It’s not very significant in and of itself but it’s part of a broader problem of not being able to stand up to establishment conservatives, which has been an issue since inauguration day but seems to be getting worse and worse

These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.

It couldn't be framed better than that. It stinks to high freakin' heaven. No-one likes to see little kids gassed. But we are not the world's policeman. Syria with Assad is a shit-show but without Assad will be much, much worse. They just can't have good things over there and apparently neither can we.

Mattis is the worst Trump pick, Trump is a puppet of the neocons, and Tillerson, Haley, Mattis, and Coates should never have been confirmed. Bannon (or, as Trump himself suggested before running, Rand Paul) should have been declared VP. Trumpism is a farce. Tulsi 2020.

"Mattis is the worst Trump pick, Trump is a puppet of the neocons, and Tillerson, Haley, Mattis, and Coates should never have been confirmed. Bannon (or, as Trump himself suggested before running, Rand Paul) should have been declared VP. "

Trump's election itself was really improbable, but the Trump administration is even more improbable, and the reason is that gloablism is so entrenched among elites and within the Beltway that staffing a nationalist administration, whether a left nationalist or a right nationalist one, is a big problem. Trump himself is an example, as his lack of government experience has really shown in the last seventy or so days, but no one with experience at all was running on his agenda.

For example, both Ron and Rand Paul are good on many issues, but as open borders types neither can be employed in high positions in an administration whose main reason for existence is reducing immigration. Its really that simple. Getting someone who is lined up correction on all three "invade the world", "invite the world", and "in hoc to the world" is pretty much impossible. The best you can do is someone like Sessions, who is good on both immigration and trade, but will decide that the highest priority is going after pot smokers.

Then you have the issue that the federal government itself, as Mulvaney noted publically on Meet the Press, is in worse shape than most people realized. If there is a real chance of default because Congress can't pass a budget or raise the debt ceiling, you probably have to let Goldman Sachs continue to run the Treasury department for the time being. My own suggestion earlier was that Trump punt on foreign policy, keeping the Obama policies but intervening just enough to keep the US out of a ground war (this was basically Obama's own approach) and concentrate on trade and immigration, until he got up to speed.

But this is really just saying that the federal government and associated institutions may have gotten to the point where they are un-reformable. Well at least we will find out over the next four years.

The Iraqi debacle soured Bush’s presidency.
The Libyan fiasco irrevocably marred Obama’s presidency, as Obama himself recognized. May have cost H. Clinton the presidency.
Trump himself said that Obama should NOT intervene in Syria years ago when Obama was in an identical situation.
People voted for Trump precisely because he promised to be a peace candidate.
The Internet is in an uproar. The_Donald on Reddit – a.k.a. Trump central – is vociferously against intervention.

It’s simple – don’t do it, Donald! Don’t listen to the Neocons who hate your guts. Listen to the people who voted for you. Learn from the errors of Obama and Bush. Don’t become another mass murderer and war criminal by engaging in an idiotic war. Don’t ruin your presidency three months in. Go after ISIS, not Assad. Be smart.

I bet a large number of Obama voters have no idea that anything even happened in Libya during Obama's presidency, much less that he had anything to do with it.

As for Trump bombing (missle-ing?) Syria, there was always a contradiction in Trump saying he was going to avoid foreign interventions and also build up the military. Why build up the military if you don't plan to use it? Why put nothing but military guys in charge of the military, intelligence agencies, and homeland security? But one missle attack doesn't mean we're gonna invade Syria either.

Stay out. You don’t withdraw from war, if you continue to be engaged in war. He said he would get us out of the endless, mindless wars of trying to save Muslims from themselves. Let them fight it out with any means they have. War is hell; war should be hell; let’s get the hell out.

Stay out. You don’t withdraw from war, if you continue to be engaged in war. He said he would get us out of the endless, mindless wars of trying to save Muslims from themselves. Let them fight it out with any means they have. War is hell; war should be hell; let’s get the hell out.

We aren't out as long as we are supplying Israel with $5 billion annually in military hardware and providing it with diplomatic cover.

The cool kids at treehouse and other places are saying OK Trump knew it was a false flag but calculated the benefits of this strike and decided it solved so many problems at once that he gave it the go ahead anyway.

So why wouldn’t the false flag perps do it again? The sickos might decide now is the time to stage a truly spectacular and gruesome operation. And what is Trump’s move then?

Seems like now the stage is set for the real chess move. Maybe another much larger false flag outside of Syria carried out by an angry supporter of Assad.

I've been saying that for months - despite being a shrewd man, Trump has no idea just how hard the Deep State pushes for war. He has no idea about what happens to presidents who resist the siren song to "let slip the dogs of war".

Best money says it was an accident--the bombing target was an enemy weapons cache that happened to have chemical weapon stored there for future mischief. Or, one of Assads' dumbass subordinates didn't get the memo against chem. warfare or some internal enemy arranged the loading of chem. or it's a complete hoax which an autopsy of the dead would repeal. I think the accident scenario is the one to bet.

An amazing flip flop in an incredibly short amount of time. Can anyone name another instance where an administration went from saying they weren’t worried about a guy to bombing him in so short a time frame? What, a week at most?This is the most worrisome trait of Trump’s: how fast he can change his mind.

You have to wonder why Assad would do this. Things seemed to be going his way. The NYT has an article up speculating about his motives, which seems to boil down to “He thought he could get away with it”, which doesn’t seem convincing. But then again none of us are experts on Assad, so who knows?

The attack on Syria doesn’t make a nationalist feel good, coming so soon on the heels of Bannon being kicked off the NSC. On the other hand, our involvement may not escalate beyond this. It’ll be interesting to see what Russia does. Either way I don’t think it’s the end of the world, or that it means Trump completely sold out. Wait and see.

It would be very strange for Assad to have used chemical weapons on a bunch of civilians and beautiful babies. No doubt that Assad is an evil enough asshole to do this but why use chemical weapons? Conventional bombs would work just as well. Assad knows that if America intervenes, it will be against him. So if Assad is rational at all, he wants to keep the U.S. from intervening. But Assad should have been happy that Trump was elected because Trump appeared to be, at a minimum, very reluctant to get involved in Syria. From Obama's red line incident, Assad should know that using chemical weapons increases the chance of U.S. intervention. It would at least make a bunch of politicians, including some bigwigs in the President's own party like McCain, scream for a U.S. response. Why provoke the U.S.? Assad has been killing people for years. Everybody here was talking about so-called Russian hacking, immigration, etc. Not Syria. Why make Syria an issue in the U.S. and possibly cause the U.S. to intervene? Assad could have done it but he's really stupid if he did. I'm not an expert but it doesn't seem like he's stupid.

Look at how Obama promised to shut down Guantanamo and then changed his mind once he saw the evidence that the US intelligence agencies showed him. Could be the same story, Assad could be a real son of a bitch. Wait a bit to decide

I think Trump should be removed from office. We’re not going to get a wall or an immigration moratorium anyway, so why tolerate an impulsive buffoon who’ll put the world in jeopardy on a whim? He didn’t even wait for an investigation to be completed. Now, he’s spinning it as “launched quickly for the element of surprise.” What a liar! He acted impulsively because he’s an idiot who can’t think for himself and now he’s spinning his way out of it.

MANY people voted for him because they wished to avoid exactly what he just did. He ignored them and committed an act of war while also violating international law and the constitution. He needs to go and Sessions needs to be questioned on whether or not he advised Trump on the legality of this action. If he said it was legal, he also needs to go.

Trump has proved that he’ll betray his base without thought. During the election, he was a symbol of resistance against political correctness and anti-white racism, but that’s all he was. He wasn’t what people really wanted him to be. He says “buy American” but appointed a Goldman Sachs guy as economic adviser. He said Iraq was a mistake but seems willing to repeat it with Syria. He embarrasses us on Twitter. He demoted Bannon. He said “drain the swamp” but filled it with unqualified cronies and family members. He was nothing but a charlatan all along.

In my opinion, the Russians have no choice but to retaliate in some fashion, otherwise Putin is DOA. That’s a dangerous situation…all caused by this idiot. I’ve also read a report that is speculating that the US is hacking North Korean missiles and causing them to fail. He strikes me as very dangerous. Maybe Pence would be more even handed.

In my opinion, the Russians have no choice but to retaliate in some fashion, otherwise Putin is DOA.

Against the US? Color me skeptical. He might bomb the Kurds, but why? They're a reliable thorn in Turkey's side. If the Russians do anything against US troops, then the Russian presence in Syria is DOA - Trump will evict them post-haste.

Pence would be even worse, a huge neocon warmonger and a Christian Zionist to boot. Everything else that you have written is spot on. Trump is nothing but a buffoon, a liar and a traitor. He is also dangerous. If he is willing to go this far with Syria based on such shaky evidence, what else could he do? It is really terrifying to think.

Unfortunately, Trump supporters are between a rock and a hard place. If Trump goes, then its Pence.

Trump is sincere. Trump is up against nearly all the powers that be that have been successfully influencing the most powerful country in the world. You will note that he is almost the only one of them DC lot to oppose Syrian intervention

Hillary would have gone to war without any chemical attack. Add the neocons, etc.

President Trump just fell for a McMaster Disaster. This is Trump’s second enormous, avoidable blunder.

Would anyone care to bet that Steve Bannon was banished from attending National Security Council meetings precisely because the McMaster-Deep State Neocons were licking their chops over an opportunity to throw U.S. military might against someone, something, anything in Syria?

The Iraqi debacle soured Bush's presidency.
The Libyan fiasco irrevocably marred Obama's presidency, as Obama himself recognized. May have cost H. Clinton the presidency.
Trump himself said that Obama should NOT intervene in Syria years ago when Obama was in an identical situation.
People voted for Trump precisely because he promised to be a peace candidate.
The Internet is in an uproar. The_Donald on Reddit - a.k.a. Trump central - is vociferously against intervention.

It's simple - don't do it, Donald! Don't listen to the Neocons who hate your guts. Listen to the people who voted for you. Learn from the errors of Obama and Bush. Don't become another mass murderer and war criminal by engaging in an idiotic war. Don't ruin your presidency three months in. Go after ISIS, not Assad. Be smart.

I bet a large number of Obama voters have no idea that anything even happened in Libya during Obama’s presidency, much less that he had anything to do with it.

As for Trump bombing (missle-ing?) Syria, there was always a contradiction in Trump saying he was going to avoid foreign interventions and also build up the military. Why build up the military if you don’t plan to use it? Why put nothing but military guys in charge of the military, intelligence agencies, and homeland security? But one missle attack doesn’t mean we’re gonna invade Syria either.

He also went on an on about defeating ISIS with a whole ridiculous McCarthyesque spiel about how he had a secret brilliant plan guaranteed to work that he couldn't reveal because it would tip off the enemy

I guess step one of his super secret plan was giving ISIS a victory in Syria

A build-up doesn't have to be about actual war. Most of our weapons of war are never expected to be used. I thought part of the point was to fight against ISIS, but apparently not.

He staffed up on military guys for the same reason he used so many Big Business types, I'd have thought: because they're the only portion of the Permanent Government that are reliably near-rightist. There aren't enough true-blue rightists amongst the managerial elite to run a White Castle, let alone the U.S. government.

Obviously, there's a downside to being surrounded by so many crewcuts, even if they're better than SJWs. But I think it could still have been okay so long as he didn't give into the neocons, the Deep State, and the "intelligence community" in general. But apparently no.

Either Trump is at least temporarily their bitch, or he's the most brilliant politician ever. I wouldn't bank on the latter.

I keep seeing people say this is a betrayal of Trump's base. Do you really think so? He was the rank and file military's candidate, not to mention the Israel lovers candidate. I would think a large part of his base is thrilled by this.

These kind of comments are why Steve Bannon is about to lose his job: people think he's in charge. That kind of thing doesn't sit well with Uncle Donald. You think Bannon appearing on the cover of Time magazine under the title "The Great Manipulator" doesn't have something to do with him losing influence?

Trump ran on immigration restriction and fair trade for over a year before he hired Steve Bannon, winning the GOP nomination in that time. Get a grip.

Sorry if I haven't fallen in love and have been bedazzled by Ivanka Trump by so many others. I don't dislike her, but she is a little too ambitious and aggressive for my tastes. I also think she is a bit light in her loafers.

I don't think she has a core set of convictions and principles. She seems easily distracted and gloms onto stylish and fashionable things that are dragged in front of her. She has zero damned business being in the WH.

She is given an office there? WTH?!?!@@? NO! We didn't vote for Ivanka, if she wants to hold office then let her run.

Ivanka should stick to her business and her line of clothing and so on. She has no business being involved in any national policy decisions and neither does her husband.

Does that tweet alone offer any evidence of support for an attack? Doesn't what is written in the tweet simply articulate the basic reaction that any humane and compassionate person would have upon seeing the referenced images? I know I feel outraged at whomever was responsible for such barbarism. But that doesn't mean that I think a military attack is a prudent or even acceptable response (at least not one by the U.S.).

Total Win for NeverTrumpers/Neocons. Trump is essentially a hostage of a Deep State & a Senate that won’t confirm Nationalists or Noninterventionists to his cabinet. A necessary precondition to a more nationalist presidency is to have an at least mildly nationalist Senate. It is getting harder to see what Trump can achieve this year with Deep State & their allies opposing him. The PaleoRight was purged from DC in the 98-2012 window & we are paying a big price for that now.

Possible that the chemical bombing was a false flag operation by the CIA. Who knows? But overall, I think Trump made the right move sending in the Tomahawks. It accomplishes several things:
1. Sends message to the world that Trump is more aggressive than Obama. More willing to kick some ass.
2. Sends message to Premier Xi that he is willing to use direct intervention against North Korea, so they had better step up and help fix that problem.
3. Makes KJ Un wonder how far he can go before he may be next to get the Tomahawks.
4. Confounds Dems who are chasing the Trump-Russia connection, especially when this was a move against Russian interests (Tillerson saying Russkies were insincere or inept not to know about the gassing).
5. Provokes positive feelings for Trump from those (never Trumpers) who have seen the videos of the suffering children and feel good that ‘something’ wasa done about it.

There are probably some other benefits. Ultimately though, Trump will never send more than a few ground troops into Syria. His bigger play in the mideast is (or should be) destabilizing Iran politically to rid that country of the crazy Mullahs.

3. Makes KJ Un wonder how far he can go before he may be next to get the Tomahawks.

An interesting point I hadn't considered. Heard an interview on ecoshock recently about an EMP burst from the sun trashing our ability to function. I hadn't realised a well placed nuke would be so effective at shutting things down, it made sense at the current unease with North Korea.

Gutted at Trump today and already sore at him messing with Bannon. The moment Trump was inaugurated he should've been sending neo-cons to prison on any old nonsense charge to get them out of the way until he had time to think.

Allowing the mind to forget those 60 missiles must land, I heard they were 2 million a piece.

His bigger play in the mideast is (or should be) destabilizing Iran politically to rid that country of the crazy Mullahs.

That sounds like a terrific idea. Trump should make you Secretary of State. I mean what could go wrong? Destabilising other countries always works really well.

OK, you could end up with millions of refugees fleeing the country. You could end up with American troops stationed in Iran for the next twenty years. And the day they pull out the place collapses into chaos. You could end up having to spend a trillion dollars on nation-building. But otherwise it's a really great idea. Do you have any other swell foreign policy ideas you'd like to share with us?

The limited statement of aims that Trump gave wasn't bad (Stephen Miller's work?): chemical weapons are illegal under international treaties, and it is in our interest to punish any use of them. In so far as that goes, fine. If it is limited to that, then maybe this won't betoken a return to invade-the-world (which Trump hadn't really stopped so far anyway)/

Assad will just have to go back to killing civilians with explosives and shrapnel, which is how civilized governments slaughter innocents.

The Iraqi debacle soured Bush's presidency.
The Libyan fiasco irrevocably marred Obama's presidency, as Obama himself recognized. May have cost H. Clinton the presidency.
Trump himself said that Obama should NOT intervene in Syria years ago when Obama was in an identical situation.
People voted for Trump precisely because he promised to be a peace candidate.
The Internet is in an uproar. The_Donald on Reddit - a.k.a. Trump central - is vociferously against intervention.

It's simple - don't do it, Donald! Don't listen to the Neocons who hate your guts. Listen to the people who voted for you. Learn from the errors of Obama and Bush. Don't become another mass murderer and war criminal by engaging in an idiotic war. Don't ruin your presidency three months in. Go after ISIS, not Assad. Be smart.

Trump's poll support is precarious. It's completely dependent on his base.

Huge risk here.

What if the deepest darkest CIA/MOSSAD team does something mega-outrageous to raise the stakes?

I keep seeing people say this is a betrayal of Trump’s base. Do you really think so? He was the rank and file military’s candidate, not to mention the Israel lovers candidate. I would think a large part of his base is thrilled by this.

I keep seeing people say this is a betrayal of Trump’s base. Do you really think so? He was the rank and file military’s candidate, not to mention the Israel lovers candidate. I would think a large part of his base is thrilled by this.

The evangelical Christians always enjoy a good war. They'll be onboard.

What about the working-class voters in the Rust Belt states? Working-class voters are notoriously gullible when politicians start thumping the patriotic drum.

The big losers will be the alt-right. They're about to be thrown under the bus. They're no longer needed.

The thing about politicians who practise the gentle art of betrayal is that they usually thrive. Look at Churchill. Betrayal works.

In 2008 and 2012, active duty military donated more to, and voted more for PEACE CANDIDATE RON PAUL than for any other candidate in the primaries. So having the support of active military suggests that one should STAY OUT of unnecessary nondefensive wars.

If this is a one off rather than policy, this is not that big a deal. Reports indicate Russia was warned well in advance to remove their personnel, and statements from them indicate they no longer are giving Assad full support.

If however this is the first move in a ground war or more extensive military action in Syria, it's a disaster. Would go against everything Candidate Trump's sensibly said President Trump would not do. Further he had no Congressional authorization for this;' he is walking into an impeachment trap should he go any further . For 3 decades our foreign policy has been dictated but what ever heart-wrenching video cable networks can show to pull at our heartstrings without concern for the cost in American blood and lucre.

In spite of media reaction, or perhaps befitting it, this was really nothing, like Bill C. dropping ordnance on the pharma factory in Sudan. By the way, there’s yer new headline talking-point, Trump wagging the dog to distract from his Russia Scandals or Kellyanne Conway’s feet on the couch. In other words, a day ending in Y.

I anticipate the Unz Rev bullpen getting disenchanted and crestfallen, and penning their new versions of The God That Failed to go on sale from CreateSpace for $8.95. Basically I still think Trump is non-interventionist, though not very ideological about it. Through the ideological lens, this looks like an error. The Colin Powell “If you break it you bought it” is true despite being clumsily expressed. We shouldn’t be prodding ISIS’s battlefield opponents except under utilitarian ends of protecting our soldiers (who shouldn’t be over there to begin with, yeah yeah, but guess what, they are). Through the barely ideological, shake-up-the-Beltway Trumpian amateur kabuki lens, this is easy for him to explain, like a caped superhero setting the drug dealer’s lab on fire. I think it will be hilarious to watch the contortions of the Russian Menace thumpers adjusting to this “nonsensical plot twist.” Day 28: Trump Still Offers No Evidence of R2P Quality-Assurance of Syria Strike

If false flag atrocities are rewarded it will encourage more false flag atrocities.

With Trump accepting the latest performance by the White Helmets theater group at face value and giving the neo-cons what they want you can expect a made-for-the-cameras atrocity to take place in the Ukraine in the very near future.

I bet a large number of Obama voters have no idea that anything even happened in Libya during Obama's presidency, much less that he had anything to do with it.

As for Trump bombing (missle-ing?) Syria, there was always a contradiction in Trump saying he was going to avoid foreign interventions and also build up the military. Why build up the military if you don't plan to use it? Why put nothing but military guys in charge of the military, intelligence agencies, and homeland security? But one missle attack doesn't mean we're gonna invade Syria either.

He also went on an on about defeating ISIS with a whole ridiculous McCarthyesque spiel about how he had a secret brilliant plan guaranteed to work that he couldn’t reveal because it would tip off the enemy

I guess step one of his super secret plan was giving ISIS a victory in Syria

Another voter who’s shocked that a politician did what he said he wouldn’t do. Didn’t Obama campaign on an non-interventionist foreign policy too? I mean, who campaigns by saying “I’m gonna bomb someone as soon as I get in office!”

All that matters is that Trump does what he said he’d do on immigration. Who cares about anything else. God, I hope I never find myself in a fox hole with you cut and runners.

Obviously, he'll be better at immigration than Obama, but he won't be very good. Slowing down the destruction of the American nation so that it has more time to wreak havoc elsewhere in the world is not what I liked about him. As long as America is a force for multi-kulti in the world, America should get weaker. I want more transgender soldiers for the US.

Orbán in Hungary is trying to get rid of Soros's university (CEU), the American embassy has already expressed its displeasure. If Trump attacks Orbán for attacking Soros, this will totally make me a Trump-hater. I Stand With Her now, at least Hillary would've slowly destroyed the military machine the American Empire relies on. With Trump, it's going to get stronger, while being used for the same evil things.

Hell we all remember W's promise of a more humble foreign policy, too. And how'd that work out?

It's gotten harder to believe Trump's playing 3D chess, but I'm not ready to give up on him yet. I remind myself, "Would things in any way be better if Lady MacBeth was in office?" (And the answer is, of course, NO.)

The "Strange New Respect" is right on schedule. I have always wondered why the Russians don't simply threaten to retaliate against Israel in response to American aggression, this would probably be the most effective way to coerce America and the global media into total acquiescence. Hell, if Putin blackmailed our elites with a nuclear threat towards Israel, they would probably let him annex half of Europe without a peep.

(Certain "blogs" and VDARE is picked up by Google News, but Unz Review isn't, as best I can tell.)

Last month, though, one result from Forbes by a Kenneth Rapoza mentions PNAC in the following terms:

Five years ago, neoconservative Robert Kagan from the Foreign Policy Initiative (the spin-off of the WMD story tellers over at the defunct Project for a New American Century<, aka PNAC), wrote "The World America Made" where he argued for more American soft power, more American military power, to counter who? Not ISIS. China. Kagan wrote that China would surpass the U.S. in....

In spite of media reaction, or perhaps befitting it, this was really nothing, like Bill C. dropping ordnance on the pharma factory in Sudan. By the way, there's yer new headline talking-point, Trump wagging the dog to distract from his Russia Scandals or Kellyanne Conway's feet on the couch. In other words, a day ending in Y.

I anticipate the Unz Rev bullpen getting disenchanted and crestfallen, and penning their new versions of The God That Failed to go on sale from CreateSpace for $8.95. Basically I still think Trump is non-interventionist, though not very ideological about it. Through the ideological lens, this looks like an error. The Colin Powell "If you break it you bought it" is true despite being clumsily expressed. We shouldn't be prodding ISIS's battlefield opponents except under utilitarian ends of protecting our soldiers (who shouldn't be over there to begin with, yeah yeah, but guess what, they are). Through the barely ideological, shake-up-the-Beltway Trumpian amateur kabuki lens, this is easy for him to explain, like a caped superhero setting the drug dealer's lab on fire. I think it will be hilarious to watch the contortions of the Russian Menace thumpers adjusting to this "nonsensical plot twist." Day 28: Trump Still Offers No Evidence of R2P Quality-Assurance of Syria Strike

I was with some friends tonight when the news broke, and they seemed genuinely confused that he’d attacked Syria because, in their words, “Isn’t he supposed to be friends with Russia?”

The claims of Russia having undue influence on him make it *harder* for Trump to resist calls to do something that Russia won't like--his opponents can attribute it to his desire to stay on Russia's good side.

@Hail,
Unfortunately, I think most of Trump's cabinet picks and advisers are being influenced by the Neocons. Pence, Haley, McMaster, Perry, and even Mattis all sound like Neocons. I did kinda see this coming when John Bolton and Eliot Abrams were being seriously considered for key positions in the State Department. I guess Paul Gottfried was right when he said that the Neocons would survive a Trump victory.

,I'm still wondering why Ann Coulter does not have a position in Trump's Administration. When everyone was laughing at Trump in 2015, she kept saying Trump would win if he stuck to the immigration issue. Trump would not be in this mess, if he was listening to Coulter, Bannon, and Kris Kobach.

Ann Coulter turns on Donald Trump in scathing Twitter tirade over Syria attack
Ann Coulter no longer appears to be on board the "Trump Train" as she went off on a wild rant on Twitter over the recent attack in Syria.

Thanks for opening up a thread about this. I think it’s a terrible mistake and really hope that it won’t escalate. In case someone is interested, I wrote a very detailed blog post, in which I examine the evidence about the recent chemical attack and compare the situation with what happened after the chemical attack in Ghouta in August 2013. I argue that, in that previous case, the media narrative had rapidly unravelled and that, for that reason, we should be extremely prudent about the recent attack and not jump to conclusions. It’s more than 5,000 words long and I provide a source for every single factual claim I make. I really believe it’s the most through discussion of the allegations against Assad with respect to his alleged use of chemical weapons out there. Please share it if you thought it was interesting.

You need to provide links to one additional fact: I haven't seen the Farouq Brigade called "moderate". (In fact, I haven't heard them mentioned anywhere, so that might be more my ignorance than anything, but still, in a well-sourced post it needs to be sourced, too.)

Everyone is focused on these two chess moves action & reaction and that is understandable. But what is terrifying is the next move. Cruise missiles are not enough for the NWO. They want to force Trump to wreck/reset Syria just like Iraq with a massive ground invasion. It can be done with a big enough false flag. A revisit of 9/11.

Trump has left himself open to a huge false flag. He should’ve called bullish*t on this smaller one to scare them off. McCain is gleeful.

If we stop with a few cruise missiles, then it's no big deal. My fear is that we've been sliding toward a land war in Syria for the last couple years, and if we let that continue, I expect it will go as badly as Afghanistan and Iraq and Libya and Yemen.

I think Trump should be removed from office. We're not going to get a wall or an immigration moratorium anyway, so why tolerate an impulsive buffoon who'll put the world in jeopardy on a whim? He didn't even wait for an investigation to be completed. Now, he's spinning it as "launched quickly for the element of surprise." What a liar! He acted impulsively because he's an idiot who can't think for himself and now he's spinning his way out of it.

MANY people voted for him because they wished to avoid exactly what he just did. He ignored them and committed an act of war while also violating international law and the constitution. He needs to go and Sessions needs to be questioned on whether or not he advised Trump on the legality of this action. If he said it was legal, he also needs to go.

Trump has proved that he'll betray his base without thought. During the election, he was a symbol of resistance against political correctness and anti-white racism, but that's all he was. He wasn't what people really wanted him to be. He says "buy American" but appointed a Goldman Sachs guy as economic adviser. He said Iraq was a mistake but seems willing to repeat it with Syria. He embarrasses us on Twitter. He demoted Bannon. He said "drain the swamp" but filled it with unqualified cronies and family members. He was nothing but a charlatan all along.

In my opinion, the Russians have no choice but to retaliate in some fashion, otherwise Putin is DOA. That's a dangerous situation...all caused by this idiot. I've also read a report that is speculating that the US is hacking North Korean missiles and causing them to fail. He strikes me as very dangerous. Maybe Pence would be more even handed.

The establishment is making a statement to the unwashed masses: It doesn’t matter who you elect. We always win.

One hundred years ago - almost to the day - the United States entered WWI, sending us down the path to global empire while remaining a republic at home.

Around 50 years ago, we decided to turn a relatively homogeneous, prosperous nation into a multi-racial, multi-ethnic conglomerate and to adopt the national religion I call The Cult of Equality.

Now, we are witnessing the end of the Republic.

Trump was our last chance, as slim as it was. He had the money and arrogance to take on the establishment. He is failing us. There will not another politician who doesn't need other people's money or who is willing to get eviscerated in the press day after day.

Unless Trump start acting on immigration soon, we can list this time as the point where we knew for certain that the country was lost.

That's exactly what he should do now. Resign in protest and hold a press conference denouncing this.

These kind of comments are why Steve Bannon is about to lose his job: people think he’s in charge. That kind of thing doesn’t sit well with Uncle Donald. You think Bannon appearing on the cover of Time magazine under the title “The Great Manipulator” doesn’t have something to do with him losing influence?

Trump ran on immigration restriction and fair trade for over a year before he hired Steve Bannon, winning the GOP nomination in that time. Get a grip.

(Certain “blogs” and VDARE is picked up by Google News, but Unz Review isn’t, as best I can tell.)

Last month, though, one result from Forbes by a Kenneth Rapoza mentions PNAC in the following terms:

Five years ago, neoconservative Robert Kagan from the Foreign Policy Initiative (the spin-off of the WMD story tellers over at the defunct Project for a New American Century<, aka PNAC), wrote “The World America Made” where he argued for more American soft power, more American military power, to counter who? Not ISIS. China. Kagan wrote that China would surpass the U.S. in….

atrocious. Every film out of the Middle East is obviously staged, and the gassing evidence was no exception. Its genuinely amazing that such a low budget effort can be used, and pretend-believed.

This election, and the aftermath, have really opened my eyes. This particular bombing is almost trivial compared to the evidence that our country, and our president, and the decisionmakers in power can be so brazenly manipulated.

the particular bombing is also trivial compared to the realization that Trump is not turning out to be what Trumpians hoped. We were hoping for a genuine change of course: Andrew Jackson redux. Doesn’t appear to be coming true.

These kind of comments are why Steve Bannon is about to lose his job: people think he's in charge. That kind of thing doesn't sit well with Uncle Donald. You think Bannon appearing on the cover of Time magazine under the title "The Great Manipulator" doesn't have something to do with him losing influence?

Trump ran on immigration restriction and fair trade for over a year before he hired Steve Bannon, winning the GOP nomination in that time. Get a grip.

Bannon still is by far the most coherent and nationistic of his advisors.

I bet a large number of Obama voters have no idea that anything even happened in Libya during Obama's presidency, much less that he had anything to do with it.

As for Trump bombing (missle-ing?) Syria, there was always a contradiction in Trump saying he was going to avoid foreign interventions and also build up the military. Why build up the military if you don't plan to use it? Why put nothing but military guys in charge of the military, intelligence agencies, and homeland security? But one missle attack doesn't mean we're gonna invade Syria either.

These kind of comments are why Steve Bannon is about to lose his job: people think he's in charge. That kind of thing doesn't sit well with Uncle Donald. You think Bannon appearing on the cover of Time magazine under the title "The Great Manipulator" doesn't have something to do with him losing influence?

Trump ran on immigration restriction and fair trade for over a year before he hired Steve Bannon, winning the GOP nomination in that time. Get a grip.

I don't support attacking Syria either, but did you really expect the President of the United States to stay out of every single military confrontation in the world, especially in the Middle East? That just seems naive to me, expecting one man to overturn 40 years of Washington consensus in less than three months. I just think this isn't as big a deal as some people are making it. Maybe I'll be proved wrong in the coming days and weeks, we shall see.

The Iraqi debacle soured Bush's presidency.
The Libyan fiasco irrevocably marred Obama's presidency, as Obama himself recognized. May have cost H. Clinton the presidency.
Trump himself said that Obama should NOT intervene in Syria years ago when Obama was in an identical situation.
People voted for Trump precisely because he promised to be a peace candidate.
The Internet is in an uproar. The_Donald on Reddit - a.k.a. Trump central - is vociferously against intervention.

It's simple - don't do it, Donald! Don't listen to the Neocons who hate your guts. Listen to the people who voted for you. Learn from the errors of Obama and Bush. Don't become another mass murderer and war criminal by engaging in an idiotic war. Don't ruin your presidency three months in. Go after ISIS, not Assad. Be smart.

In spite of media reaction, or perhaps befitting it, this was really nothing, like Bill C. dropping ordnance on the pharma factory in Sudan. By the way, there's yer new headline talking-point, Trump wagging the dog to distract from his Russia Scandals or Kellyanne Conway's feet on the couch. In other words, a day ending in Y.

I anticipate the Unz Rev bullpen getting disenchanted and crestfallen, and penning their new versions of The God That Failed to go on sale from CreateSpace for $8.95. Basically I still think Trump is non-interventionist, though not very ideological about it. Through the ideological lens, this looks like an error. The Colin Powell "If you break it you bought it" is true despite being clumsily expressed. We shouldn't be prodding ISIS's battlefield opponents except under utilitarian ends of protecting our soldiers (who shouldn't be over there to begin with, yeah yeah, but guess what, they are). Through the barely ideological, shake-up-the-Beltway Trumpian amateur kabuki lens, this is easy for him to explain, like a caped superhero setting the drug dealer's lab on fire. I think it will be hilarious to watch the contortions of the Russian Menace thumpers adjusting to this "nonsensical plot twist." Day 28: Trump Still Offers No Evidence of R2P Quality-Assurance of Syria Strike

If false flag atrocities are rewarded it will encourage more false flag atrocities.

With Trump accepting the latest performance by the White Helmets theater group at face value and giving the neo-cons what they want you can expect a made-for-the-cameras atrocity to take place in the Ukraine in the very near future.

atrocious. Every film out of the Middle East is obviously staged, and the gassing evidence was no exception. Its genuinely amazing that such a low budget effort can be used, and pretend-believed.

This election, and the aftermath, have really opened my eyes. This particular bombing is almost trivial compared to the evidence that our country, and our president, and the decisionmakers in power can be so brazenly manipulated.

the particular bombing is also trivial compared to the realization that Trump is not turning out to be what Trumpians hoped. We were hoping for a genuine change of course: Andrew Jackson redux. Doesn't appear to be coming true.

joeyjoejoe

his particular bombing is almost trivial compared to the evidence that our country, and our president, and the decisionmakers in power can be so brazenly manipulated.

That’s one silver lining – more people woke to what a media con our entire society has become.

Stay out. You don't withdraw from war, if you continue to be engaged in war. He said he would get us out of the endless, mindless wars of trying to save Muslims from themselves. Let them fight it out with any means they have. War is hell; war should be hell; let's get the hell out.

Stay out. You don’t withdraw from war, if you continue to be engaged in war. He said he would get us out of the endless, mindless wars of trying to save Muslims from themselves. Let them fight it out with any means they have. War is hell; war should be hell; let’s get the hell out.

We aren’t out as long as we are supplying Israel with $5 billion annually in military hardware and providing it with diplomatic cover.

I keep seeing people say this is a betrayal of Trump's base. Do you really think so? He was the rank and file military's candidate, not to mention the Israel lovers candidate. I would think a large part of his base is thrilled by this.

I bet a large number of Obama voters have no idea that anything even happened in Libya during Obama's presidency, much less that he had anything to do with it.

As for Trump bombing (missle-ing?) Syria, there was always a contradiction in Trump saying he was going to avoid foreign interventions and also build up the military. Why build up the military if you don't plan to use it? Why put nothing but military guys in charge of the military, intelligence agencies, and homeland security? But one missle attack doesn't mean we're gonna invade Syria either.

Trump saying he was going to avoid foreign interventions and also build up the military.

President Trump just fell for a McMaster Disaster. This is Trump's second enormous, avoidable blunder.

Would anyone care to bet that Steve Bannon was banished from attending National Security Council meetings precisely because the McMaster-Deep State Neocons were licking their chops over an opportunity to throw U.S. military might against someone, something, anything in Syria?

Has a soft coup has just happened? As evidenced by Bannon's demotion and Trump's 180. The 'Iraq Cake Walk' Neocon old gang back in control?

The media narrative may already by shifting pro-Trump:

https://twitter.com/SamSacks/status/850166028738973696

Has Trump effectively been "puppetized"?

The “Strange New Respect” is right on schedule. I have always wondered why the Russians don’t simply threaten to retaliate against Israel in response to American aggression, this would probably be the most effective way to coerce America and the global media into total acquiescence. Hell, if Putin blackmailed our elites with a nuclear threat towards Israel, they would probably let him annex half of Europe without a peep.

I have always wondered why the Russians don’t simply threaten to retaliate against Israel in response to American aggression, this would probably be the most effective way to coerce America and the global media into total acquiescence.

The US is mostly ruled by campaign contributions from the banking mafia and the media owned by the banking mafia so the most effective way would be to target the banks imo.

The IRA made no headway for 30 years but as soon as they started blowing up the financial sector the UK govt surrendered.

Hitler threatened US Jews with retaliation against European Jews if US is pushed into war. It didn't work, because there's no secret Jewish cabal. It only made Jews feel even more hostility to Hitler. To the extent that Jews pushed the US into war against Hitler (and it's not impossible the US would've entered without them), Hitler's threats only made them more anti-Hitler. Same thing would happen if Putin threatened Israel.

The Russians won't do that, becausse contrary to popular belief, Putin is extremely cautious, to the point of fault. The boldest thing he ever did was the takeover of Crimea, and he was even reluctant to do that. In hindsight, he probably should have gone ahead and taken the Donbas. The opportunity for that has probably passed.

These kind of comments are why Steve Bannon is about to lose his job: people think he's in charge. That kind of thing doesn't sit well with Uncle Donald. You think Bannon appearing on the cover of Time magazine under the title "The Great Manipulator" doesn't have something to do with him losing influence?

Trump ran on immigration restriction and fair trade for over a year before he hired Steve Bannon, winning the GOP nomination in that time. Get a grip.

Time to meme “President Kushner” into existence then. Why does everyone think Trump’s been neo-conned as opposed to liberal-interventionized?

Everyone is focused on these two chess moves action & reaction and that is understandable. But what is terrifying is the next move. Cruise missiles are not enough for the NWO. They want to force Trump to wreck/reset Syria just like Iraq with a massive ground invasion. It can be done with a big enough false flag. A revisit of 9/11.

Trump has left himself open to a huge false flag. He should've called bullish*t on this smaller one to scare them off. McCain is gleeful.

Exactly. The worse thing about this action is that it rewards a false flag. The same tactic will now be used against Iran and S/E Ukraine.

I bet a large number of Obama voters have no idea that anything even happened in Libya during Obama's presidency, much less that he had anything to do with it.

As for Trump bombing (missle-ing?) Syria, there was always a contradiction in Trump saying he was going to avoid foreign interventions and also build up the military. Why build up the military if you don't plan to use it? Why put nothing but military guys in charge of the military, intelligence agencies, and homeland security? But one missle attack doesn't mean we're gonna invade Syria either.

As for Trump bombing (missle-ing?) Syria, there was always a contradiction in Trump saying he was going to avoid foreign interventions and also build up the military.

That isn’t a contradiction. The glaring contradiction was his promise to beat the hell out of ISIS, eradicate ISIS.

What's the difference? They already have it. Trump just turned himself into George W Bush. He should be impeached. That'll serve as a lesson to the rest. I mean, it's not like you're going to really be getting a border wall or less immigration, so why bother with this madman?

After crocodile tears for the dead women and children the best he could muster up is that ‘someone has to do something’

It had to be one of the least inspiring calls to war in the annals of history.

“I think what Assad did is terrible. I think what happened in Syria is one of the truly egregious crimes. It shouldn’t have happened. It shouldn’t be allowed to happen,” Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One. “I think what happened in Syria is a disgrace to humanity. He’s there, and I guess he’s running things, so something should happen.”

Here is a small part of Bush’s speech on Iraq:

The cause of peace requires all free nations to recognize new and undeniable realities. In the 20th century, some chose to appease murderous dictators, whose threats were allowed to grow into genocide and global war. In this century, when evil men plot chemical, biological and nuclear terror, a policy of appeasement could bring destruction of a kind never before seen on this earth.

Obviously, Trump is no George Bush in terms of rhetoric, but I note a distinct lack of passion for this.

The Washington Post ran a story that discussed the decision to use Tomahawk missiles. They are the least risky way to bomb something.

Trump did get burned on the covert mission in Yemen. That was the general’s idea. He started blaming them immediately.

This won’t go well and Trump, but Trump will be blaming it on someone else the second something goes wrong. He already blamed Obama for not doing it when he should have.

I was quite excited about Tillerson saying that we no longer cared about Assad last week. Why not pick the internationally recognized leader of state and winner?

If he is stupid enough to put boots on the ground …. and to actually try to remove Assad …. that makes him another Obama.

Somehow I can’t imagine Trump ‘taking one for the team’ and accepting any responsibility or blame. This deeply ingrained character trait could serve him well.

Another voter who's shocked that a politician did what he said he wouldn't do. Didn't Obama campaign on an non-interventionist foreign policy too? I mean, who campaigns by saying "I'm gonna bomb someone as soon as I get in office!"

All that matters is that Trump does what he said he'd do on immigration. Who cares about anything else. God, I hope I never find myself in a fox hole with you cut and runners.

All that matters is that Trump does what he said he’d do on immigration.

True. Does this action help or harm the prospect of achieving results on immigration.

Having dipped his pen in ink to tick the Invade box they want him to tick the Invite one too. They're at it already, e.g. "So @POTUS cares enough about the Syrian people to launch 50 Tomahawks but not enough to let the victims of Assad find refuge & freedom here," wailed Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.).

They needn't worry: so far Trump's admitted 1,347 Syrian refugees, 98.7% of which are Muslim in spite of having once tweeted that intervention is bad because it creates refugees.

Bad info? What’s that? Shoot first, ask questions last or the terrorists win! Pay no attention to the man holding the strings. This is President Donald Trump speaking…I am not a puppet. I am the decider!

As bad as it all turned out, at least W attacked Iraq under the pretext, which turned out to be false, that Saddam Hussein had stockpiles of WMD. The implication being that he could use them against the U.S. Here, there is not even an argument that the Assad regime is any kind of a threat to the U.S. They're just mean.

This, along with his own base being disgruntled or angry about the Syria Attack (check Ann Coulter as a consistent representative voice for this base), must tell Trump he is wrong.

But I do suspect he has been puppetized by Neocon elements around him.

,
Unfortunately, I think most of Trump’s cabinet picks and advisers are being influenced by the Neocons. Pence, Haley, McMaster, Perry, and even Mattis all sound like Neocons. I did kinda see this coming when John Bolton and Eliot Abrams were being seriously considered for key positions in the State Department. I guess Paul Gottfried was right when he said that the Neocons would survive a Trump victory.

I don’t support attacking Syria either, but did you really expect the President of the United States to stay out of every single military confrontation in the world, especially in the Middle East? That just seems naive to me, expecting one man to overturn 40 years of Washington consensus in less than three months. I just think this isn’t as big a deal as some people are making it. Maybe I’ll be proved wrong in the coming days and weeks, we shall see.

An amazing flip flop in an incredibly short amount of time. Can anyone name another instance where an administration went from saying they weren't worried about a guy to bombing him in so short a time frame? What, a week at most?This is the most worrisome trait of Trump's: how fast he can change his mind.

You have to wonder why Assad would do this. Things seemed to be going his way. The NYT has an article up speculating about his motives, which seems to boil down to "He thought he could get away with it", which doesn't seem convincing. But then again none of us are experts on Assad, so who knows?

The attack on Syria doesn't make a nationalist feel good, coming so soon on the heels of Bannon being kicked off the NSC. On the other hand, our involvement may not escalate beyond this. It'll be interesting to see what Russia does. Either way I don't think it's the end of the world, or that it means Trump completely sold out. Wait and see.

Reasons listed include the Rooskies, the FBI, and of course, good old fashioned misogyny.

Compare and contrast :

‘This [the sexual assault] was all my doing and I take full responsibility. You can’t **** about with people, especially people who wear “I Heart Rape” badges… those motorcycle gangs, that’s what they do.”

Miss Hynde, now 63, said it was ‘common sense’ advice, adding: ‘Don’t wear high heels so you can’t run from him. If you’re wearing something that says “Come and **** me”, you’d better be good on your feet.

‘If I’m walking around in my underwear and I’m drunk? Who else’s fault can it be?’

I have a proposition for HRH Queen Elizabeth II: Give Miss Hynde, a 40+ year resident of the UK who bore two children of British fathers in the UK, a peerage, or we’ll draft her to come back to the US and run for President. (Besides, you know it would be comeuppance for Sir Mick and his constant, irresponsible reproductive behaviour.)

This, along with his own base being disgruntled or angry about the Syria Attack (check Ann Coulter as a consistent representative voice for this base), must tell Trump he is wrong.

But I do suspect he has been puppetized by Neocon elements around him.

,
I’m still wondering why Ann Coulter does not have a position in Trump’s Administration. When everyone was laughing at Trump in 2015, she kept saying Trump would win if he stuck to the immigration issue. Trump would not be in this mess, if he was listening to Coulter, Bannon, and Kris Kobach.

The Republicans decided in favor of the nuclear option regarding Supreme Court nominees.

However, I think we will see them start going nuclear on everything. I’ll admit I don’t fully get it, but the Senate Rules can be ignored with 50 votes plus the VP. It seems that a super majority is required to change the rules, but not to suspend them.

For all the handwringing over cloture, the filibuster was always just a work around. That is, it cut off debate. Period. But if the Senate was a well functioning deliberative body, they wouldn’t refuse to vote on most issues. Refusing to vote isn’t deliberation.

All votes (except treaties) are simple majority. It was only a beneficial tactic when it wasn’t used frequently. The media shorthand for the rules is that it takes 60 votes. Like 60 votes for everything.

This strikes me as potentially a huge deal.

Bombing something has become simply something to do when we don’t have a better idea. And this isn’t even bombing — just lighting up a military base.

All that matters is that Trump does what he said he’d do on immigration.

True. Does this action help or harm the prospect of achieving results on immigration.

Having dipped his pen in ink to tick the Invade box they want him to tick the Invite one too. They’re at it already, e.g. “So @POTUS cares enough about the Syrian people to launch 50 Tomahawks but not enough to let the victims of Assad find refuge & freedom here,” wailed Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.).

They needn’t worry: so far Trump’s admitted 1,347 Syrian refugees, 98.7% of which are Muslim in spite of having once tweeted that intervention is bad because it creates refugees.

The "Strange New Respect" is right on schedule. I have always wondered why the Russians don't simply threaten to retaliate against Israel in response to American aggression, this would probably be the most effective way to coerce America and the global media into total acquiescence. Hell, if Putin blackmailed our elites with a nuclear threat towards Israel, they would probably let him annex half of Europe without a peep.

Israel has some nice submarines (courtesy of the Germans) from which they can launch nuclear missiles.

Having dipped his pen in ink to tick the Invade box they want him to tick the Invite one too. They're at it already, e.g. "So @POTUS cares enough about the Syrian people to launch 50 Tomahawks but not enough to let the victims of Assad find refuge & freedom here," wailed Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.).

They needn't worry: so far Trump's admitted 1,347 Syrian refugees, 98.7% of which are Muslim in spite of having once tweeted that intervention is bad because it creates refugees.

they want him to tick the Invite [box] too.

I’ve got some photographs of refugee children that may do the trick. On loan from Frau Merkel.

Possible that the chemical bombing was a false flag operation by the CIA. Who knows? But overall, I think Trump made the right move sending in the Tomahawks. It accomplishes several things:
1. Sends message to the world that Trump is more aggressive than Obama. More willing to kick some ass.
2. Sends message to Premier Xi that he is willing to use direct intervention against North Korea, so they had better step up and help fix that problem.
3. Makes KJ Un wonder how far he can go before he may be next to get the Tomahawks.
4. Confounds Dems who are chasing the Trump-Russia connection, especially when this was a move against Russian interests (Tillerson saying Russkies were insincere or inept not to know about the gassing).
5. Provokes positive feelings for Trump from those (never Trumpers) who have seen the videos of the suffering children and feel good that 'something' wasa done about it.

There are probably some other benefits. Ultimately though, Trump will never send more than a few ground troops into Syria. His bigger play in the mideast is (or should be) destabilizing Iran politically to rid that country of the crazy Mullahs.

This makes sense. Trump loves to throw curve balls and stay unpredictable. And seeending missiles is not the same as invading Iraq.

I thought he did a good job of explaining his justification on the recorded statement put out tonight: use of chemical weapons anywhere is contrary to American interests and warrants a response.

use of chemical weapons anywhere is contrary to American interests and warrants a response.

WTF?? American interests better come down to defending the borders, keeping the people that hate us out and sending them out, getting ready for a financial crash that will make Great Depression 1.0 look like a coke party on Wall Street, and making sure we don't become the 3rd world!

What in the hell does chemical weapons use in Syria have to do with America, at all?

After crocodile tears for the dead women and children the best he could muster up is that 'someone has to do something'

It had to be one of the least inspiring calls to war in the annals of history.

"I think what Assad did is terrible. I think what happened in Syria is one of the truly egregious crimes. It shouldn't have happened. It shouldn't be allowed to happen," Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One. "I think what happened in Syria is a disgrace to humanity. He's there, and I guess he's running things, so something should happen."

Here is a small part of Bush's speech on Iraq:

The cause of peace requires all free nations to recognize new and undeniable realities. In the 20th century, some chose to appease murderous dictators, whose threats were allowed to grow into genocide and global war. In this century, when evil men plot chemical, biological and nuclear terror, a policy of appeasement could bring destruction of a kind never before seen on this earth.

Obviously, Trump is no George Bush in terms of rhetoric, but I note a distinct lack of passion for this.

The Washington Post ran a story that discussed the decision to use Tomahawk missiles. They are the least risky way to bomb something.

Trump did get burned on the covert mission in Yemen. That was the general's idea. He started blaming them immediately.

This won't go well and Trump, but Trump will be blaming it on someone else the second something goes wrong. He already blamed Obama for not doing it when he should have.

I was quite excited about Tillerson saying that we no longer cared about Assad last week. Why not pick the internationally recognized leader of state and winner?

If he is stupid enough to put boots on the ground .... and to actually try to remove Assad .... that makes him another Obama.

Somehow I can't imagine Trump 'taking one for the team' and accepting any responsibility or blame. This deeply ingrained character trait could serve him well.

Overall, he looks like a sucker. For the moment.

It had to be one of the least inspiring calls to war in the annals of history…. I note a distinct lack of passion for this. …

Another contender is the Obama Is Always Wrong Theory. He pulled Obama to pieces for the red line and for thinking of intervening. Then appropriated the red line and, to show he's not "weak" like Obama, followed through.

I don't support attacking Syria either, but did you really expect the President of the United States to stay out of every single military confrontation in the world, especially in the Middle East? That just seems naive to me, expecting one man to overturn 40 years of Washington consensus in less than three months. I just think this isn't as big a deal as some people are making it. Maybe I'll be proved wrong in the coming days and weeks, we shall see.

Seems a big deal at least because it is certainly in violation of international law and probably unlawful under the Constitution.

I'm opposed to the attack on Syria but who cares about international law? If (unlike in this case) it's in our national interest, then do it. International law be damned. International law is not law at all. What sovereign power enacts and enforces international law?

Who cares about a few missiles? Israel bombs Syria every now and again and nobody thinks it’s going to be a prelude to an endless occupation. A superpower like the US can drop cruise missiles on whoever it wants, and will occasionally do so. Stop pissing your pants and focus on immigration.

I keep seeing people say this is a betrayal of Trump's base. Do you really think so? He was the rank and file military's candidate, not to mention the Israel lovers candidate. I would think a large part of his base is thrilled by this.

I keep seeing people say this is a betrayal of Trump’s base. Do you really think so? He was the rank and file military’s candidate, not to mention the Israel lovers candidate. I would think a large part of his base is thrilled by this.

The evangelical Christians always enjoy a good war. They’ll be onboard.

What about the working-class voters in the Rust Belt states? Working-class voters are notoriously gullible when politicians start thumping the patriotic drum.

The big losers will be the alt-right. They’re about to be thrown under the bus. They’re no longer needed.

The thing about politicians who practise the gentle art of betrayal is that they usually thrive. Look at Churchill. Betrayal works.

The evangelical Christians always enjoy a good war. They’ll be onboard.

Exactly. These people have marinated in enough pro-Israel Chuck Norris films and Left Behind books that they're happy to see the Christians of the Middle East wiped off the map so long as Bibi has still got a grin on his face.

The thing about politicians who practise the gentle art of betrayal is that they usually thrive. Look at Churchill. Betrayal works.

De Gaulle proved it too when he told the French in Algeria "I have understood you" and then left them with "the suitcase or the coffin" as their options a few years later. That's where the Front National comes from, not the Vichy regime. Will Trump rack up enough betrayals to spawn an American Jean-Marie Le Pen with his own Front National?

I wouldn't be too quick to pronounce the eulogy. Trump was always an imperfect ambassador for America Firstism. Better than Hillary, but very impetuous and unrooted. Surely there is another leader out there who is more ideologically grounded than Trump who could pick up the banner.

It had to be one of the least inspiring calls to war in the annals of history.... I note a distinct lack of passion for this. ...

+1 for puppetization theory

Another contender is the Obama Is Always Wrong Theory. He pulled Obama to pieces for the red line and for thinking of intervening. Then appropriated the red line and, to show he’s not “weak” like Obama, followed through.

The "Strange New Respect" is right on schedule. I have always wondered why the Russians don't simply threaten to retaliate against Israel in response to American aggression, this would probably be the most effective way to coerce America and the global media into total acquiescence. Hell, if Putin blackmailed our elites with a nuclear threat towards Israel, they would probably let him annex half of Europe without a peep.

I have always wondered why the Russians don’t simply threaten to retaliate against Israel in response to American aggression, this would probably be the most effective way to coerce America and the global media into total acquiescence.

The US is mostly ruled by campaign contributions from the banking mafia and the media owned by the banking mafia so the most effective way would be to target the banks imo.

The IRA made no headway for 30 years but as soon as they started blowing up the financial sector the UK govt surrendered.

I don't support attacking Syria either, but did you really expect the President of the United States to stay out of every single military confrontation in the world, especially in the Middle East? That just seems naive to me, expecting one man to overturn 40 years of Washington consensus in less than three months. I just think this isn't as big a deal as some people are making it. Maybe I'll be proved wrong in the coming days and weeks, we shall see.

It’s not one man, it’s over 60 million voters and 37/50 states. Replay Trump’s inauguration speech, or his final TV ad, and tell me anybody voted for this. Democracy, isn’t it grand?

It’s not one man, it’s over 60 million voters and 37/50 states. Replay Trump’s inauguration speech, or his final TV ad, and tell me anybody voted for this. Democracy, isn’t it grand?

The sad truth though is that it's not just an elite plot. A lot of ordinary Americans love war. They love waving their American flags and gushing over the brave boys in uniform. And working-class Americans (like working-class people everywhere) are very susceptible to this. When you have nothing in your life to feel good about it's nice to be able to feel good about killing foreigners. It's even better when you don't have to do the killing yourself, you can just watch it on TV. It's better than football.

That, in and of itself, isn’t necessarily bad since majority of Americans are decent people.

It’s the Second problem in combination with first problem that makes the world so toxic.

Among various groups in the US, there is only on superpower group. Jewish.

In the past, the lone superpower group within the US was Anglo or Wasp.

And then, esp after WWII, the power got more balanced among Wasps, Catholics, Irish, Ethnics, blacks, Jews. Also, there used to be the generational divide that pit Experience vs Youth.

But over time, Youth Culture took over everything, and even old people still listen to youth music and rock. And if boomer rebelled against elders, today’s youths take all their cues from teachers and Pop culture controlled by boomer/ X gen elders.

Wasp power declined fast. Ethnic power also faded as various ethnics — Italians, Irish, Polish, etc — just became generic Americans, hardly an identity to rally around. Blacks got stuck in rage politics and self-destruction. Religious identity faded and Catholics grew weak. Evangelicals and Southerners got numerical power but not much brains.

Meanwhile Jewish power rose and rose. In time, Jews became the superpower group in America. The only one. There was a time when Anglos were the lone superpower group. And then, there was balance among various groups since end of WWII. But then, the only group that was perpetually on the rise were Jews.

There has been massive non-white immigrants, but most Mexicans and other such are lackluster in gaining elite power. As for Asians, they do better in schools and make decent money, but they lack spark and unity among themselves. Whereas all Jews tend to become ONE in the US regardless of their national origin(Hungary, Poland, Russia, Germany etc), the various Asians groups don’t see eye to eye on anything. Chinese and Hindus as one people? Fat chance. Since Asians generally follow and suck up to power, they just do whatever is necessary to gain favor from Jewish elites.
Muslims haven’t amounted to much either.

So, we have a dangerous situation. US is the only superpower in the world, and the US is ruled by one ethnicity as the lone superpower group. This group is only 2% of the US population but have tremendous power over brain and nerve centers of law, economy, government, judiciary, and etc. If not for First Amendment of the US constitution, even this comment could be deemed illegal(as in Europe), and I could be hunted down. Thank Todd for the first amendment.

If Jews were the lone superpower group in a multi-polar world, it wouldn’t be so dangerous. In that case, even if Jews controlled the US, the US would not control the world that is multi-polar and balanced among other great powers. So, there would be balance, and the US, even if Jewish-dominated, would respect that balance.

But the US is the lone power and controls the world. So, WHO controls the US is very important to all the world. If there was balance of powers among various racial/ethnic groups within the US, it wouldn’t be so bad since different groups will balance each other’s interests.

It’s like various parties balance each other out in a democracy. One-party system can lead to autocracy. In the US, we have a one-group system despite there being many groups and despite the supreme one-group being only 2% of the population.

Suppose Palestinian Americans and Russian-gentile-Americans and Iranian-Americans also had considerable clout in the US. Then, US foreign policy wouldn’t be so rabidly Zionist and Judeo-centric. But since there is NO balance of powers among the various groups in the US, the US as lone superpower is essentially a War Machine for the Tribe as the only superpower group in the US. This is very dangerous. For all the world to tremble before the supremacist interests of such a small number… it’s out of whack. The New War on Russia is a Jewish War on Russia. Sure, Jews use homo proxies and pussy riots proxies — just like ‘white helmets’ are used as proxies in Syria —, but the puppet-masters are the Tribe.

Long ago, UK sought to maintain balance of power on the European continent so that no single nation will consolidate all of Europe and pose a threat to UK.
Now, something must be done to bring forth some kind of ethnic or group balance in America because Jewish lone-superpower-group domination is greedily exploiting and driving all of American power to serve very narrow interests, albeit under cover of ‘principles’ like ‘human rights’, ‘liberal democracy’, and etc.

Nikki Haley is just like the Azid kid. She will whore out in any way and anyhow to rise up the ladder and play the game. Just a whore of power and privilege.

Anyway, if the US were the lone superpower in the world BUT didn’t have a lone superpower group to hog all the power internally, there would be some restraint to US power. Even if US is the most powerful nation, its global agenda would be balanced due to various contending forces within the US. It’s like Greek Americans side with Greek Cypriots and Turkish Americans side with Turkish Cypriots. But as neither side is dominant, US doesn’t use its power to favor Turks or Greeks. Balance. And because Irish-Americans were very powerful, they applied pressure on the US to sue for peace in Northern Ireland than just side with UK. So, US respected both British interests and Irish interests. But pity the Palestinians. They got no power at all. So, even after so many yrs of Zionist occupation, all we hear from US politicians is “Israel, Israel, Israel”.

Problem is Jews have become the lone superpower group in the US. This is more dangerous than when Anglos were the only superpower group. For one thing, since Anglos were the majority for good part of US history, it seemed just that they wielded the most power. And even when wasps were no longer the majority, they made up substantial number of Americans, and besides, many ethnics had become Anglo-Americanized and shared in the values and interests.
So, Wasp power did represent many peoples and even groups within America.

But Jews have never been more than 3% of the US population. So, for them to have lone superpower status within the US throws things out of balance. If the US had three superpower groups, even that wouldn’t be so bad. If wasps, Jews, and Hispanics were three superpower groups, there would be some kind of balance among them. But Jews are the ONLY superpower group now. White gentiles could become a superpower group if they all pulled together, but white identity is deemed either suspect(even evil) or too generic. So, whites are like a slug with no backbone.

In the other scenario, suppose the US has Jews as lone superpower group but American power is on par with Iran or Brazil. In that case, Jews would dominate the US but the US would not dominate the world. And that makes for some balance in the world.

But when Jews are lone superpower in the US that is the lone superpower in the world, that is a dangerous mix.
Jews have achieved in America what Napoleon or Hitler sought in Continental Europe. Control over all.

Traditionally, the two powers that did most to maintain balance in the Continent were UK and Russia. Both feared the unification of Europe. Napoleon and Hitler who unified Europe attacked UK and Russia. In both wars, UK and Russia were allied. And it seems rather logical that UK would exit EU before others. Still, UK is no longer what it used to be. It’s a spent power, a poodle of the US. Russia is still a major power though also greatly diminished.

US and EU united under Jewish hegemony is very dangerous to the world. And we are seeing it.

Both Hillary and Bill Kristol are applauding Trump, which is very, very bad.

It couldn’t be framed better than that. It stinks to high freakin’ heaven. No-one likes to see little kids gassed. But we are not the world’s policeman. Syria with Assad is a shit-show but without Assad will be much, much worse. They just can’t have good things over there and apparently neither can we.

Actually we are, and have been since at least the late 1940s. I agree that it would probably be better for us if we resigned that position (or were a lot more conservative about when to take up that role, at least), but we are the world's policeman, alas.

No one likes to see little kids go malnourished, and without access to safe drinking water and wastewater treatment, either.

Should we blast away on countries beyond Syria who aren't taking proper care of their children? Cuba? Venezuela? Chad probably has starving babies. Nothing that a few surgical pinpricks couldn't help, said Bill Kristol and John Bolton.

John Bolton is on the local am 'conservative' radio in DC every week. The hosts just wet their pants over him. "Mr Ambassador." Boy I can imagine the neocons are ready to install Bolton at the Pentagon now, and ramp this up and TCOB.

Another voter who's shocked that a politician did what he said he wouldn't do. Didn't Obama campaign on an non-interventionist foreign policy too? I mean, who campaigns by saying "I'm gonna bomb someone as soon as I get in office!"

All that matters is that Trump does what he said he'd do on immigration. Who cares about anything else. God, I hope I never find myself in a fox hole with you cut and runners.

All that matters is that Trump does what he said he’d do on immigration.

True. But it’s still bad. There’ll be strange new respect for DJT in all the wrong places over the next few days.

I keep seeing people say this is a betrayal of Trump’s base. Do you really think so? He was the rank and file military’s candidate, not to mention the Israel lovers candidate. I would think a large part of his base is thrilled by this.

The evangelical Christians always enjoy a good war. They'll be onboard.

What about the working-class voters in the Rust Belt states? Working-class voters are notoriously gullible when politicians start thumping the patriotic drum.

The big losers will be the alt-right. They're about to be thrown under the bus. They're no longer needed.

The thing about politicians who practise the gentle art of betrayal is that they usually thrive. Look at Churchill. Betrayal works.

The conservative treehouse posters are ecstatic about this “show of strength.” So depressingly, mainstream working class will go along so as not to look “anti-military.”

I’m feel terribly defeated right now, like we are just finished as a people. And wtf does Israel think is going to happen when we are gone?

The conservative treehouse posters are ecstatic about this “show of strength.” So depressingly, mainstream working class will go along so as not to look “anti-military.”

People love having someone to hate. It's so much easier than trying to find real solutions to real problems. Why go to all that trouble when you can just blame Russia? Or China. Or Iran. Or North Korea. I assume Assad is now officially Hitler? There always has to be a Hitler.

And Americans are embarrassingly prone to worship of the military. In an almost pornographic way.

It's also an incredible temptation for a president. Firing missiles at foreigners in distant countries is a lot easier than dealing with a hostile Congress and a hostile judiciary. It's an almost irresistible temptation for a president who realises he has zero chance of doing any of the things he promised to do.

The Conservative Treehouse is good on racial politics and inside-the-beltway maneuvering but hopeless on foreign policy. The writer going by the name Sundance believes in some 'Freedom Caucus' nonsense centered around (guess who) Our Greatest Ally.And the comment section is filled with "Trump's got this! He's playing 7D chess!" type stupidity.

It's best not to podcast under the influence of alcohol. I don't necessarily disagree with what he's saying, but even without the wineglass in view it's like listening to the rant of a guy in a bar, leaning too close.

Who cares about a few missiles? Israel bombs Syria every now and again and nobody thinks it's going to be a prelude to an endless occupation. A superpower like the US can drop cruise missiles on whoever it wants, and will occasionally do so. Stop pissing your pants and focus on immigration.

Trump has lost my support. The only part of his agenda I still have any sympathy for is on immigration, but the issue is not terribly important to me. The only thing that comforts me is Hillary Clinton said publicly she’d do what Trump is doing – so we’d be no better off with Clinton in charge.
The ball is in Russia’s court to respond – so we’ll have to wait and see how this plays out.
I hope the libertarians in the GOP, both in House and Senate join the democrats to block Trump at every step. I’d like to see Obamacare repealed (without being replaced), but there’s not enough votes to make it happen anyway. At this stage it’s better to thwart Trump and stop him before he becomes even more dangerous than he already is.

Possible that the chemical bombing was a false flag operation by the CIA. Who knows? But overall, I think Trump made the right move sending in the Tomahawks. It accomplishes several things:
1. Sends message to the world that Trump is more aggressive than Obama. More willing to kick some ass.
2. Sends message to Premier Xi that he is willing to use direct intervention against North Korea, so they had better step up and help fix that problem.
3. Makes KJ Un wonder how far he can go before he may be next to get the Tomahawks.
4. Confounds Dems who are chasing the Trump-Russia connection, especially when this was a move against Russian interests (Tillerson saying Russkies were insincere or inept not to know about the gassing).
5. Provokes positive feelings for Trump from those (never Trumpers) who have seen the videos of the suffering children and feel good that 'something' wasa done about it.

There are probably some other benefits. Ultimately though, Trump will never send more than a few ground troops into Syria. His bigger play in the mideast is (or should be) destabilizing Iran politically to rid that country of the crazy Mullahs.

His bigger play in the mideast is (or should be) destabilizing Iran politically to rid that country of the crazy Mullahs.

Yeah, I’m sure there’s nothing more important than this. Except fighting racism and sexism and Homophobia and Islamophobia and anti-Semitism, that is.

Very disappointing development. Not so much the cruise missile attack which is nothing on the scale of things, akin to Bush the father saying “message: I care” without doing much damage or risking American lives.

More disappointing is Trump’s willingness to be stampeded by an obvious hoax staged for the benefit of the world media. The 2013 Syrian gas attack was proven to be a hoax as was the perfectly posed dead toddler on the beach. Why couldn’t he see that this was a hoax too?
Then to top it off he claims that the attack was justified because of the threat to US national security. The word for word repudiation of his own words in those tweets from the last few years makes it more appalling.

A pollyanna would say that Trump is a genius taking the Russia lies off the front page, showing that he is “doing something” (while really doing nothing) while defusing calls for more serious intervention. Flexing US muscle in front of the Chinese and their Korean dogs could also be claimed to be part of his strategy.

My gut tells me this latter interpretation is bullshit. The demotion of Bannon and the rise in prominence of Mr and Mrs Kushner are signs that point to yes as well.
All the people who pinned their hopes on Trump in November never imagined that these two twits would be calling the shots as the result of that

good point...nevertheless when Obama bombed Syria he dropped them on rebels not the Assad regime. Attacking the Assad regime directly, as Trump just did, creates a new set of problems. There were Russians at the base the US struck, thus Putin is outraged at this act of aggression.

Trump was very foolish to listen to the neocons and getting rid of Bannon is not a good sign. Why would he trust the intelligence operatives , knowing they are liars who are are working to undermine his administration and embarrass Trump..I doubt very much that Assad was behind the gas attacks, if they were actually gas attacks.

hopefully Trump does not escalate this military action and try to depose Assad. Very foolish action by Trump, he gains little political support and lost millions of his base.

Trump was always a buffoon — the main point of supporting Trump was to keep HRC out of the White House — also to deliver a richly deserved kick in the teeth to the Establishment — the hope was that once in office, he would somehow grow into the job — surround himself with competent people ideologically aligned with his campaign rhetoric, especially on immigration and economic nationalism — people who would help him formulate a policy and legislative agenda — with this action he has alienated a great many of those who voted for him — but the people who always despised him will still despise him — which brings me back to where I started: he’s apparently too stupid to realize that, a buffoon — but then I already felt that way after seeing his son-in-law riding in a helicopter over Iraq.

I don't support attacking Syria either, but did you really expect the President of the United States to stay out of every single military confrontation in the world, especially in the Middle East? That just seems naive to me, expecting one man to overturn 40 years of Washington consensus in less than three months. I just think this isn't as big a deal as some people are making it. Maybe I'll be proved wrong in the coming days and weeks, we shall see.

I don’t care that Trump launched a few dozen Tomahawks into Syria. The problem is he is hitting the wrong side.

Who cares about a few missiles? Israel bombs Syria every now and again and nobody thinks it's going to be a prelude to an endless occupation. A superpower like the US can drop cruise missiles on whoever it wants, and will occasionally do so. Stop pissing your pants and focus on immigration.

Stop pissing your pants and focus on immigration.

Trump is selling out on that too. 100 days in and he has…. signed an EO that was predictably blocked in court, and that’s it.

No revoking Obama’s executive amnesty, no suspending refugee programs, no removing all countries from the TPS list.

It’s a straightforward breach of international law and the US’s treaty commitments, but that’s nothing particularly new.

It’s a straightforward unconstitutional act, which would be a problem if the US Congress had any self respect and wasn’t stocked with corrupt placeholders for war lobbies of various kinds, and the mainstream media the same.

It’s a murder of a foreign country’s military servicemen when that country is officially at peace with the US, which would be a problem if any Americans weren’t hypocrites.

So if it really is limited to this one token strike, there will be a bit of a diplomatic fuss as usual, the US’s enemies will make sure the US pays a price elsewhere, and in its criminal sense it will have little significance.

In the sense however of being “worse than a crime, a blunder”, perhaps the worst aspect is that it really does appear that Trump actually changed his mind (or had it changed for him) over the alleged “chemical attack”. Real or not, a few deaths by unfashionable means in the midst of an ongoing civil war is not the kind of trivial emotive fluff that leaders should be making decisions on war and peace over. It looks like Trump really is the airhead he was always portrayed as, but some of us hoped he wasn’t.

If, as seems possible, this is a one off, “symbolic” strike then its only long term significance internationally will be as a marker that confirms that the recently signalled change of policy away from regime change in Syria is dead on arrival. It will be of far greater significance for Trump in US political terms, I think.

Very disappointing development. Not so much the cruise missile attack which is nothing on the scale of things, akin to Bush the father saying "message: I care" without doing much damage or risking American lives.

More disappointing is Trump's willingness to be stampeded by an obvious hoax staged for the benefit of the world media. The 2013 Syrian gas attack was proven to be a hoax as was the perfectly posed dead toddler on the beach. Why couldn't he see that this was a hoax too?Then to top it off he claims that the attack was justified because of the threat to US national security. The word for word repudiation of his own words in those tweets from the last few years makes it more appalling.

A pollyanna would say that Trump is a genius taking the Russia lies off the front page, showing that he is "doing something" (while really doing nothing) while defusing calls for more serious intervention. Flexing US muscle in front of the Chinese and their Korean dogs could also be claimed to be part of his strategy.

My gut tells me this latter interpretation is bullshit. The demotion of Bannon and the rise in prominence of Mr and Mrs Kushner are signs that point to yes as well. All the people who pinned their hopes on Trump in November never imagined that these two twits would be calling the shots as the result of that

It doesn’t matter if it is a hoax or not. The people living under the bombs are aligned with Al Qaeda, and should live in fear of such attacks.

I agree immigration matters most. But I see no progress. The DACA program, which Trump could have ended with the stroke of a pen, is still running. The visa restriction program was blocked by a judge and the Trump Administration chooses to fight in the unfavorable judicial forum, rather than defying the order. I don't know about the refugee program, but that needs to be ended immediately.

Larry Auster once said that the difference between the two parties' immigration policies is that the Democrats intend to drive off the cliff at 95 MPH, while the Republicans will do so at the speed limit. That still seems true.

Possible that the chemical bombing was a false flag operation by the CIA. Who knows? But overall, I think Trump made the right move sending in the Tomahawks. It accomplishes several things:
1. Sends message to the world that Trump is more aggressive than Obama. More willing to kick some ass.
2. Sends message to Premier Xi that he is willing to use direct intervention against North Korea, so they had better step up and help fix that problem.
3. Makes KJ Un wonder how far he can go before he may be next to get the Tomahawks.
4. Confounds Dems who are chasing the Trump-Russia connection, especially when this was a move against Russian interests (Tillerson saying Russkies were insincere or inept not to know about the gassing).
5. Provokes positive feelings for Trump from those (never Trumpers) who have seen the videos of the suffering children and feel good that 'something' wasa done about it.

There are probably some other benefits. Ultimately though, Trump will never send more than a few ground troops into Syria. His bigger play in the mideast is (or should be) destabilizing Iran politically to rid that country of the crazy Mullahs.

3. Makes KJ Un wonder how far he can go before he may be next to get the Tomahawks.

An interesting point I hadn’t considered. Heard an interview on ecoshock recently about an EMP burst from the sun trashing our ability to function. I hadn’t realised a well placed nuke would be so effective at shutting things down, it made sense at the current unease with North Korea.

Gutted at Trump today and already sore at him messing with Bannon. The moment Trump was inaugurated he should’ve been sending neo-cons to prison on any old nonsense charge to get them out of the way until he had time to think.

Allowing the mind to forget those 60 missiles must land, I heard they were 2 million a piece.

"An interesting point I hadn’t considered. Heard an interview on ecoshock recently about an EMP burst from the sun trashing our ability to function. I hadn’t realised a well placed nuke would be so effective at shutting things down, it made sense at the current unease with North Korea."

This has become a fashionable doomsday scenario of late. However, it is not clear to me that there is any truth to it. It may prove to be about as realistic a scenario as the Y2K apocalypse. Whether a strong solar event could knock out electrical power distribution over an entire hemisphere is unknown.

Also unknown is whether a nuclear weapon could do so (I suspect it could not). There were a number of high altitude nuclear weapons tests conducted in the early 60s, by both the US and the Soviet Union. The course of history was not altered. Of course, they were not conducted over highly populated regions.

Possible that the chemical bombing was a false flag operation by the CIA. Who knows? But overall, I think Trump made the right move sending in the Tomahawks. It accomplishes several things:
1. Sends message to the world that Trump is more aggressive than Obama. More willing to kick some ass.
2. Sends message to Premier Xi that he is willing to use direct intervention against North Korea, so they had better step up and help fix that problem.
3. Makes KJ Un wonder how far he can go before he may be next to get the Tomahawks.
4. Confounds Dems who are chasing the Trump-Russia connection, especially when this was a move against Russian interests (Tillerson saying Russkies were insincere or inept not to know about the gassing).
5. Provokes positive feelings for Trump from those (never Trumpers) who have seen the videos of the suffering children and feel good that 'something' wasa done about it.

There are probably some other benefits. Ultimately though, Trump will never send more than a few ground troops into Syria. His bigger play in the mideast is (or should be) destabilizing Iran politically to rid that country of the crazy Mullahs.

My impression of Iran is a bunch of young people who would be openly drinking alcohol tomorrow if the old clerics who took power in the late 1970's were to disappear. Never been there so I'm happy to be proved wrong.

Another voter who's shocked that a politician did what he said he wouldn't do. Didn't Obama campaign on an non-interventionist foreign policy too? I mean, who campaigns by saying "I'm gonna bomb someone as soon as I get in office!"

All that matters is that Trump does what he said he'd do on immigration. Who cares about anything else. God, I hope I never find myself in a fox hole with you cut and runners.

Obviously, he’ll be better at immigration than Obama, but he won’t be very good. Slowing down the destruction of the American nation so that it has more time to wreak havoc elsewhere in the world is not what I liked about him. As long as America is a force for multi-kulti in the world, America should get weaker. I want more transgender soldiers for the US.

Orbán in Hungary is trying to get rid of Soros’s university (CEU), the American embassy has already expressed its displeasure. If Trump attacks Orbán for attacking Soros, this will totally make me a Trump-hater. I Stand With Her now, at least Hillary would’ve slowly destroyed the military machine the American Empire relies on. With Trump, it’s going to get stronger, while being used for the same evil things.

"As long as America is a force for multi-kulti in the world, America should get weaker."

I agree. Seems like Trump will turn out to be a disaster, will probably be harmful to European nationalists...they should disassociate themselves from him and become openly and vehemently anti-American if they already aren't so. It looks like the political situation in the US is irredeemable.
And frankly, no offense intended to most of the people commenting here, but when I read some of the statements by (presumably white working class) braindead Trump supporters justifying this strike and indulging their misguided flag-waving nationalism, I can't help but feel that those people deserve being inundated by Mexicans and getting shafted by Trump's Wall Street cronies. If you're that stupid, you don't deserve any sympathy.

It's not one man, it's over 60 million voters and 37/50 states. Replay Trump's inauguration speech, or his final TV ad, and tell me anybody voted for this. Democracy, isn't it grand?

It’s not one man, it’s over 60 million voters and 37/50 states. Replay Trump’s inauguration speech, or his final TV ad, and tell me anybody voted for this. Democracy, isn’t it grand?

The sad truth though is that it’s not just an elite plot. A lot of ordinary Americans love war. They love waving their American flags and gushing over the brave boys in uniform. And working-class Americans (like working-class people everywhere) are very susceptible to this. When you have nothing in your life to feel good about it’s nice to be able to feel good about killing foreigners. It’s even better when you don’t have to do the killing yourself, you can just watch it on TV. It’s better than football.

The conservative treehouse posters are ecstatic about this "show of strength." So depressingly, mainstream working class will go along so as not to look "anti-military."

I'm feel terribly defeated right now, like we are just finished as a people. And wtf does Israel think is going to happen when we are gone?

The conservative treehouse posters are ecstatic about this “show of strength.” So depressingly, mainstream working class will go along so as not to look “anti-military.”

People love having someone to hate. It’s so much easier than trying to find real solutions to real problems. Why go to all that trouble when you can just blame Russia? Or China. Or Iran. Or North Korea. I assume Assad is now officially Hitler? There always has to be a Hitler.

And Americans are embarrassingly prone to worship of the military. In an almost pornographic way.

It’s also an incredible temptation for a president. Firing missiles at foreigners in distant countries is a lot easier than dealing with a hostile Congress and a hostile judiciary. It’s an almost irresistible temptation for a president who realises he has zero chance of doing any of the things he promised to do.

The "Strange New Respect" is right on schedule. I have always wondered why the Russians don't simply threaten to retaliate against Israel in response to American aggression, this would probably be the most effective way to coerce America and the global media into total acquiescence. Hell, if Putin blackmailed our elites with a nuclear threat towards Israel, they would probably let him annex half of Europe without a peep.

I have always wondered why the Russians don’t simply threaten to retaliate against Israel in response to American aggression

Russia and Israel are actually allies and on good terms with each other. (Despite Syria.)

That, in and of itself, isn't necessarily bad since majority of Americans are decent people.

It's the Second problem in combination with first problem that makes the world so toxic.

Among various groups in the US, there is only on superpower group. Jewish.

In the past, the lone superpower group within the US was Anglo or Wasp.

And then, esp after WWII, the power got more balanced among Wasps, Catholics, Irish, Ethnics, blacks, Jews. Also, there used to be the generational divide that pit Experience vs Youth.

But over time, Youth Culture took over everything, and even old people still listen to youth music and rock. And if boomer rebelled against elders, today's youths take all their cues from teachers and Pop culture controlled by boomer/ X gen elders.

Wasp power declined fast. Ethnic power also faded as various ethnics -- Italians, Irish, Polish, etc -- just became generic Americans, hardly an identity to rally around. Blacks got stuck in rage politics and self-destruction. Religious identity faded and Catholics grew weak. Evangelicals and Southerners got numerical power but not much brains.

Meanwhile Jewish power rose and rose. In time, Jews became the superpower group in America. The only one. There was a time when Anglos were the lone superpower group. And then, there was balance among various groups since end of WWII. But then, the only group that was perpetually on the rise were Jews.

There has been massive non-white immigrants, but most Mexicans and other such are lackluster in gaining elite power. As for Asians, they do better in schools and make decent money, but they lack spark and unity among themselves. Whereas all Jews tend to become ONE in the US regardless of their national origin(Hungary, Poland, Russia, Germany etc), the various Asians groups don't see eye to eye on anything. Chinese and Hindus as one people? Fat chance. Since Asians generally follow and suck up to power, they just do whatever is necessary to gain favor from Jewish elites.
Muslims haven't amounted to much either.

So, we have a dangerous situation. US is the only superpower in the world, and the US is ruled by one ethnicity as the lone superpower group. This group is only 2% of the US population but have tremendous power over brain and nerve centers of law, economy, government, judiciary, and etc. If not for First Amendment of the US constitution, even this comment could be deemed illegal(as in Europe), and I could be hunted down. Thank Todd for the first amendment.

If Jews were the lone superpower group in a multi-polar world, it wouldn't be so dangerous. In that case, even if Jews controlled the US, the US would not control the world that is multi-polar and balanced among other great powers. So, there would be balance, and the US, even if Jewish-dominated, would respect that balance.

But the US is the lone power and controls the world. So, WHO controls the US is very important to all the world. If there was balance of powers among various racial/ethnic groups within the US, it wouldn't be so bad since different groups will balance each other's interests.

It's like various parties balance each other out in a democracy. One-party system can lead to autocracy. In the US, we have a one-group system despite there being many groups and despite the supreme one-group being only 2% of the population.

Suppose Palestinian Americans and Russian-gentile-Americans and Iranian-Americans also had considerable clout in the US. Then, US foreign policy wouldn't be so rabidly Zionist and Judeo-centric. But since there is NO balance of powers among the various groups in the US, the US as lone superpower is essentially a War Machine for the Tribe as the only superpower group in the US. This is very dangerous. For all the world to tremble before the supremacist interests of such a small number... it's out of whack. The New War on Russia is a Jewish War on Russia. Sure, Jews use homo proxies and pussy riots proxies --- just like 'white helmets' are used as proxies in Syria ---, but the puppet-masters are the Tribe.

Long ago, UK sought to maintain balance of power on the European continent so that no single nation will consolidate all of Europe and pose a threat to UK.
Now, something must be done to bring forth some kind of ethnic or group balance in America because Jewish lone-superpower-group domination is greedily exploiting and driving all of American power to serve very narrow interests, albeit under cover of 'principles' like 'human rights', 'liberal democracy', and etc.

Nikki Haley is just like the Azid kid. She will whore out in any way and anyhow to rise up the ladder and play the game. Just a whore of power and privilege.

Anyway, if the US were the lone superpower in the world BUT didn't have a lone superpower group to hog all the power internally, there would be some restraint to US power. Even if US is the most powerful nation, its global agenda would be balanced due to various contending forces within the US. It's like Greek Americans side with Greek Cypriots and Turkish Americans side with Turkish Cypriots. But as neither side is dominant, US doesn't use its power to favor Turks or Greeks. Balance. And because Irish-Americans were very powerful, they applied pressure on the US to sue for peace in Northern Ireland than just side with UK. So, US respected both British interests and Irish interests. But pity the Palestinians. They got no power at all. So, even after so many yrs of Zionist occupation, all we hear from US politicians is "Israel, Israel, Israel".

Problem is Jews have become the lone superpower group in the US. This is more dangerous than when Anglos were the only superpower group. For one thing, since Anglos were the majority for good part of US history, it seemed just that they wielded the most power. And even when wasps were no longer the majority, they made up substantial number of Americans, and besides, many ethnics had become Anglo-Americanized and shared in the values and interests.
So, Wasp power did represent many peoples and even groups within America.

But Jews have never been more than 3% of the US population. So, for them to have lone superpower status within the US throws things out of balance. If the US had three superpower groups, even that wouldn't be so bad. If wasps, Jews, and Hispanics were three superpower groups, there would be some kind of balance among them. But Jews are the ONLY superpower group now. White gentiles could become a superpower group if they all pulled together, but white identity is deemed either suspect(even evil) or too generic. So, whites are like a slug with no backbone.

In the other scenario, suppose the US has Jews as lone superpower group but American power is on par with Iran or Brazil. In that case, Jews would dominate the US but the US would not dominate the world. And that makes for some balance in the world.

But when Jews are lone superpower in the US that is the lone superpower in the world, that is a dangerous mix.
Jews have achieved in America what Napoleon or Hitler sought in Continental Europe. Control over all.

Traditionally, the two powers that did most to maintain balance in the Continent were UK and Russia. Both feared the unification of Europe. Napoleon and Hitler who unified Europe attacked UK and Russia. In both wars, UK and Russia were allied. And it seems rather logical that UK would exit EU before others. Still, UK is no longer what it used to be. It's a spent power, a poodle of the US. Russia is still a major power though also greatly diminished.

US and EU united under Jewish hegemony is very dangerous to the world. And we are seeing it.

Is it possible the average American Jew doesn’t understand how much power they wield and so they are constantly in a state of panic? Or maybe they are just that desperate to hold power.

What Israel & her supporters have done here is pure evil. Kiss the Syrian Christians good bye.

It's like British Power around the world. Truly awesome but vulnerable if the natives were to rise up... like in India. Rise of nationalism ended British Imperialism. The Brits had comprador-collaborator elites, but they had no moral prestige as they were puppets of imperialists. Minority elite power depends on total control of the nerve centers of the system and collaboration of the native elites. It has no grounding in the masses. Once the masses are awoken by the emergence of national elites(who refuse to collaborate), the empire begins to shake. This is why Jews are eager to expand Diversity so that the masses will be divided. Indeed, suppose South African white elites had brought in tons of Hindus, Chinese, Pakistanis, Mexicans, and etc to South Africa. Suppose, black Africans became merely one of the many groups in South Africa. Whites would still hold all the power.

(On the other hand, once the natives gain national independence and drive out imperialists, they eventually reach out to imperialists to return as 'friends' because former-imperialists do everything better. Look at Vietnam now sucking up the US. Look at Cuba begging for more tourist dollars. And even Mainland China doesn't want to reverse the system put in place in Hong Kong by the able Brits.)

One of the blessings of Muslim immigration, esp in EU, is that it undermines this agenda. Muslims are supposed to act against whites but they sometimes act against Jews.

To an extent, as much as Jews hate Trump, he's been a blessing of sorts to Jews cuz his anti-Muslim stance brought about a temporary lull in Jewish-Muslim tensions in the US. Muslims want access to the US --- for better material life --- , so they will do anything(even side with Zionists and shut up about Palestinians for the time being) to oppose and derail Trump's agenda on Muslims. Without Trump, there would have been more tensions between Jews and Muslims. But this cannot be lasting alliance because the Palestinian issue simply won't go away. And SJWs are so hungry for some new cause that they are latching onto the Palestinian issue. This is happening even among some crazy prog Jews who have become like self-loathing Jews not unlike self-hating wasps.Jews being critical of Zionism and Israel is one thing. Being suicidal is another. Some Jews are turning suicidal.

Possible that the chemical bombing was a false flag operation by the CIA. Who knows? But overall, I think Trump made the right move sending in the Tomahawks. It accomplishes several things:
1. Sends message to the world that Trump is more aggressive than Obama. More willing to kick some ass.
2. Sends message to Premier Xi that he is willing to use direct intervention against North Korea, so they had better step up and help fix that problem.
3. Makes KJ Un wonder how far he can go before he may be next to get the Tomahawks.
4. Confounds Dems who are chasing the Trump-Russia connection, especially when this was a move against Russian interests (Tillerson saying Russkies were insincere or inept not to know about the gassing).
5. Provokes positive feelings for Trump from those (never Trumpers) who have seen the videos of the suffering children and feel good that 'something' wasa done about it.

There are probably some other benefits. Ultimately though, Trump will never send more than a few ground troops into Syria. His bigger play in the mideast is (or should be) destabilizing Iran politically to rid that country of the crazy Mullahs.

His bigger play in the mideast is (or should be) destabilizing Iran politically to rid that country of the crazy Mullahs.

That sounds like a terrific idea. Trump should make you Secretary of State. I mean what could go wrong? Destabilising other countries always works really well.

OK, you could end up with millions of refugees fleeing the country. You could end up with American troops stationed in Iran for the next twenty years. And the day they pull out the place collapses into chaos. You could end up having to spend a trillion dollars on nation-building. But otherwise it’s a really great idea. Do you have any other swell foreign policy ideas you’d like to share with us?

In her first interview since her stunning presidential election defeat by Republican rival Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton on Thursday called for the United States to bomb Syrian air fields.

Clinton, in an interview at the Women in the World Summit in New York, also called Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election a theft more damaging than Watergate. (SAY WHAT???)

Asked whether she now believes that failing to take a tougher stand against Syria was her worst foreign policy mistake as secretary of state under President Barack Obama, Clinton said she favored more aggressive action against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

“I think we should have been more willing to confront Assad,” Clinton said in the interview, conducted by New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof.

“I really believe we should have and still should take out his air fields and prevent him from being able to use them to bomb innocent people and drop sarin gas on them.”

Obviously, he'll be better at immigration than Obama, but he won't be very good. Slowing down the destruction of the American nation so that it has more time to wreak havoc elsewhere in the world is not what I liked about him. As long as America is a force for multi-kulti in the world, America should get weaker. I want more transgender soldiers for the US.

Orbán in Hungary is trying to get rid of Soros's university (CEU), the American embassy has already expressed its displeasure. If Trump attacks Orbán for attacking Soros, this will totally make me a Trump-hater. I Stand With Her now, at least Hillary would've slowly destroyed the military machine the American Empire relies on. With Trump, it's going to get stronger, while being used for the same evil things.

“As long as America is a force for multi-kulti in the world, America should get weaker.”

I agree. Seems like Trump will turn out to be a disaster, will probably be harmful to European nationalists…they should disassociate themselves from him and become openly and vehemently anti-American if they already aren’t so. It looks like the political situation in the US is irredeemable.
And frankly, no offense intended to most of the people commenting here, but when I read some of the statements by (presumably white working class) braindead Trump supporters justifying this strike and indulging their misguided flag-waving nationalism, I can’t help but feel that those people deserve being inundated by Mexicans and getting shafted by Trump’s Wall Street cronies. If you’re that stupid, you don’t deserve any sympathy.

There’s just no way to stop the madness. Not even electing a man with enough money who took no serious donations who was prepared to be called Satan by these people and who had a long record of being very firm on this issue despite the public beating he took for it. Not even every intervention being agreed upon by the public and media as having been disasters. This time though, this time we’ve got several regional powers and Russia involved, it’ll be great!

Tails you lose, heads we win.

They’re really going to get round to Iran eventually aren’t they? If not with Trump then the next guy. That’s why Trump put all that money into manned space exploration, onward to Klendathu and the menace of the Arachnids and their obstinate non-recognition of Isreal’s permanent security council bid!

I don’t know if anyone else noticed, but the EU parliament also voted to give Ukrainians visa-free travel to the EU (UK might get out just in time for London to miss a massive influx) totally unconnected.

A lot of unsupported assumption here that the use of chemical weapons was some sort of false flag. It’s possible, of course, but that would seem to be a very difficult and risky operation. Just as likely this is Assad flexing on the new administration to see what happens.

Personally, I think we wind up taking a lot of this shit on faith, unfortunately. It’s remotely possible that the gas attack never happened. It’s remotely possible that it did happen, but was done by some power other than Assad to get us more involved in Syria. Most likely that if it did happen, it’s yet another tin-pot dictator who thinks it’s funny to poke the US. This is standard procedure, especially with a new administration. Iran tests missiles, Norks test nukes, Saddam used to kick out the WMD inspectors. Syria gasses their people.

Of course, on the Apprentice it was 100% reality TV, nothing was staged for effect, and Trump did not learn anything about how to stage things for effect, and certainly he never called anyone as John Miller, PR guy. ;)

A lot of unsupported assumption here that the use of chemical weapons was some sort of false flag.

It doesn't matter. A response like this without any clear investigation or agreement shows they *wanted* to attack Assad.

It’s possible, of course, but that would seem to be a very difficult and risky operation.

P. B. did it in 2013 and got away with it. It's easy when the media is controlled by people with the same agenda - like the recent story where traffic deaths in California went up but the media said they went down - all the media.

Just as likely this is Assad flexing on the new administration to see what happens.

Not remotely as likely. Assad's forces were winning with conventional weapons. You can see cui bono by all the rebel forces cheering.

Because the ship in question didn't have an Aegis system protecting it and the Argentine pilots were able to sneak up with land in their path, same trick doesn't work in the desert against modern carrier groups.

Give a few of these guys to the Iranians (Seems like it won't be properly operational for Syria, but maybe a few prototypes could still land hits) and you tilt the cost calculation on war with Iran though.

Don’t like it one bit. I thought we were going to be getting out of all these stupid expensive foreign entanglements in parts of the world where we are strangers and really don’t know what we are doing.

We don’t have a role there, whether it’s peacekeeping or warkeeping. We should be withdrawing and bringing troops home from the middle east, and all over the world.

If we want to go abroad looking for foreign monsters to destroy, we can find them everywhere.

These stupid military ventures have gotten completely out of control and decisions appear to be made by warmongering fools.

No wonder we are $20T in debt. I thought Trump was going to stop this.

We can’t fix every damned problem in the world. Will we ever wise up.

I cannot stand Nikki Haley and I don’t see much difference between her and hillary clinton. Cannot. stand. her. Big open borders neocon. One of Trump’s worst picks. WTH is he thinking.

The conservative treehouse posters are ecstatic about this "show of strength." So depressingly, mainstream working class will go along so as not to look "anti-military."

I'm feel terribly defeated right now, like we are just finished as a people. And wtf does Israel think is going to happen when we are gone?

The Conservative Treehouse is good on racial politics and inside-the-beltway maneuvering but hopeless on foreign policy. The writer going by the name Sundance believes in some ‘Freedom Caucus’ nonsense centered around (guess who) Our Greatest Ally.
And the comment section is filled with “Trump’s got this! He’s playing 7D chess!” type stupidity.

Heartbroken and outraged by the images coming out of Syria following the atrocious chemical attack yesterday.

Sorry if I haven’t fallen in love and have been bedazzled by Ivanka Trump by so many others. I don’t dislike her, but she is a little too ambitious and aggressive for my tastes. I also think she is a bit light in her loafers.

I don’t think she has a core set of convictions and principles. She seems easily distracted and gloms onto stylish and fashionable things that are dragged in front of her. She has zero damned business being in the WH.

She is given an office there? WTH?!?!@@? NO! We didn’t vote for Ivanka, if she wants to hold office then let her run.

Ivanka should stick to her business and her line of clothing and so on. She has no business being involved in any national policy decisions and neither does her husband.

I agree, Buck, and I think all women should stay out of politics altogether - they do NOT have lives on the line and threats to their families and livelihoods from governments and their minions like men do.

This stuff here is very serious, so I didn't plan on writing anything else, but you got me on "light on the loafers", Buck. I understand what that means wrt Ms. Lindsey Grahmnesty of SC for example, but how can a woman be light on the loafers?

Anyway, just because Ivanka is hot, that's no reason for anyone to listen to her about anything other than fashion and pillow-talk. What's wrong with people that they take a president's daughter seriously, especially the pres. himself?

The "Strange New Respect" is right on schedule. I have always wondered why the Russians don't simply threaten to retaliate against Israel in response to American aggression, this would probably be the most effective way to coerce America and the global media into total acquiescence. Hell, if Putin blackmailed our elites with a nuclear threat towards Israel, they would probably let him annex half of Europe without a peep.

Didn’t he warn the Russians ahead of time? Him and Putin may have some kind of deal.

The Russians, for their part, called the attack “ineffective”, and claimed Syrian authorities were looking for 36 Tomahawk missiles that "fell outside the base and missed the target." (According to the first link, 59 missiles were fired. Assuming the Russians were not embelleshing, is a >50% failure rate at hitting the side of a barn, or in this case an airfield, typical with Tomahawks?)

Possible that the chemical bombing was a false flag operation by the CIA. Who knows? But overall, I think Trump made the right move sending in the Tomahawks. It accomplishes several things:
1. Sends message to the world that Trump is more aggressive than Obama. More willing to kick some ass.
2. Sends message to Premier Xi that he is willing to use direct intervention against North Korea, so they had better step up and help fix that problem.
3. Makes KJ Un wonder how far he can go before he may be next to get the Tomahawks.
4. Confounds Dems who are chasing the Trump-Russia connection, especially when this was a move against Russian interests (Tillerson saying Russkies were insincere or inept not to know about the gassing).
5. Provokes positive feelings for Trump from those (never Trumpers) who have seen the videos of the suffering children and feel good that 'something' wasa done about it.

There are probably some other benefits. Ultimately though, Trump will never send more than a few ground troops into Syria. His bigger play in the mideast is (or should be) destabilizing Iran politically to rid that country of the crazy Mullahs.

(((Don’t worry, everything is fine, and what Trump really need to do is destabilize Iran)))

Thanks for opening up a thread about this. I think it’s a terrible mistake and really hope that it won’t escalate. In case someone is interested, I wrote a very detailed blog post, in which I examine the evidence about the recent chemical attack and compare the situation with what happened after the chemical attack in Ghouta in August 2013. I argue that, in that previous case, the media narrative had rapidly unravelled and that, for that reason, we should be extremely prudent about the recent attack and not jump to conclusions. It’s more than 5,000 words long and I provide a source for every single factual claim I make. I really believe it’s the most through discussion of the allegations against Assad with respect to his alleged use of chemical weapons out there. Please share it if you thought it was interesting.

Thanks, it’s great.

You need to provide links to one additional fact: I haven’t seen the Farouq Brigade called “moderate”. (In fact, I haven’t heard them mentioned anywhere, so that might be more my ignorance than anything, but still, in a well-sourced post it needs to be sourced, too.)

Thanks! Oh they were definitely called "moderate", but you're right that I should have provided a link, so I just edited my post to add one. Thanks for catching this!

For people who haven't read it yet, my post is here: http://necpluribusimpar.net/chemical-attack-syria/. I examine in great details the evidence about the allegations of use of chemical weapons by Assad and conclude that people have jumped to conclusions.

Another voter who's shocked that a politician did what he said he wouldn't do. Didn't Obama campaign on an non-interventionist foreign policy too? I mean, who campaigns by saying "I'm gonna bomb someone as soon as I get in office!"

All that matters is that Trump does what he said he'd do on immigration. Who cares about anything else. God, I hope I never find myself in a fox hole with you cut and runners.

>who campaigns by saying “I’m gonna bomb someone as soon as I get in office!”

Well, the neocons bought him again. Thanks, Kushner. Here we go, war again. More American boys coming home missing arms and legs and with brain damage for the greater glory of the American Empire and Israel.

The only thing I have to add that is that he really didn’t have people to fill the national-security infrastructure with. If he wants people with expertise, it’s either neocons or liberals (I know, not much difference), and the neocons sound more like Republicans. Who’s going to advise him on Syria, Kris Kobach? Jeff Sessions? The staff of Breitbart? Bannon reads a lot and is a very bright guy but he’s not going to know the fine points of Syria and Lebanon.

Nobody with nationalist sympathies could get up through the diplomatic or national-security establishment to be ready to staff the NSC or State. So it’s either the right or left halves of the Deep State, and this is what you get. At least the left halves might simply issue stern statements instead of sending our boys to war again. Obama backed out after seeing public support for a war in Syria was at about 15%.

I suppose giving the neocons some of what they want might smooth the way for his immigration agenda–what they really care about is Israel. But–that’s probably too optimistic.

Trump, if you or your staffers are reading this, I hope you've just done this to send a message to North Korea or China, or maybe one of your family just purchased some Raytheon stock. Learn from the example of GWB, whom you repudiated.

Trump received a rare opportunity to re-establish a certain red line, and he took it.

What's good for nothing is Trump's base losing its shit because of something Bill Clinton used to do to distract from sex scandals. You have the first immigration restrictionist president of the modern era and you're ready to throw it all out because he made Putin and the Iranians a little upset today? Take a chill pill and wait to see where this goes.

The traditional solution for having no one you can trust is to import foreigners. I don't suppose we could steal Fumio Kishida? If he doesn't speak English or isn't qualified, we can just outsource the state department to the Kremlin or the PRC. It would solve the problem of a drive for war nicely.

The war profiteers, Deep State operatives, and neocons are running foreign policy in the Trump administration. Just like they've run foreign policy in every recent administration, especially from Bush onward.

President Eisenhower warned us about the military-industrial complex.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY

Since then, 2 presidents have attempted to take on these people.

1. JFK - He ended up assassinated, supposedly by a guy (Oswald) who also was assassinated by another guy (Ruby) shortly afterward. Ruby would later claim LBJ did it and he was being kept from speaking the truth by a conspiracy. Years later, JFK's brother ended up assassinated by a guy (Sirhan Sirhan) who's mentally incapacitated and can barely talk.
2. Carter - His presidency was undone by Iran taking American hostages. Right after Reagan was inaugurated, the hostages were released. Then the new administration sold arms to Iran illegally (Iran-Contra).

Very disappointing development. Not so much the cruise missile attack which is nothing on the scale of things, akin to Bush the father saying "message: I care" without doing much damage or risking American lives.

More disappointing is Trump's willingness to be stampeded by an obvious hoax staged for the benefit of the world media. The 2013 Syrian gas attack was proven to be a hoax as was the perfectly posed dead toddler on the beach. Why couldn't he see that this was a hoax too?Then to top it off he claims that the attack was justified because of the threat to US national security. The word for word repudiation of his own words in those tweets from the last few years makes it more appalling.

A pollyanna would say that Trump is a genius taking the Russia lies off the front page, showing that he is "doing something" (while really doing nothing) while defusing calls for more serious intervention. Flexing US muscle in front of the Chinese and their Korean dogs could also be claimed to be part of his strategy.

My gut tells me this latter interpretation is bullshit. The demotion of Bannon and the rise in prominence of Mr and Mrs Kushner are signs that point to yes as well. All the people who pinned their hopes on Trump in November never imagined that these two twits would be calling the shots as the result of that

It’s best not to podcast under the influence of alcohol. I don’t necessarily disagree with what he’s saying, but even without the wineglass in view it’s like listening to the rant of a guy in a bar, leaning too close.

The cynic and conspiracy theorist in me makes me think that Trump made a deal with some influential people where in exchange for bombing Assad, he gets Gorusch pushed through, some cabinet appointments that Democrats are dragging their feet on, and maybe some other deals not otherwise known to me at this time.

Well, the neocons bought him again. Thanks, Kushner. Here we go, war again. More American boys coming home missing arms and legs and with brain damage for the greater glory of the American Empire and Israel.

The only thing I have to add that is that he really didn't have people to fill the national-security infrastructure with. If he wants people with expertise, it's either neocons or liberals (I know, not much difference), and the neocons sound more like Republicans. Who's going to advise him on Syria, Kris Kobach? Jeff Sessions? The staff of Breitbart? Bannon reads a lot and is a very bright guy but he's not going to know the fine points of Syria and Lebanon.

Nobody with nationalist sympathies could get up through the diplomatic or national-security establishment to be ready to staff the NSC or State. So it's either the right or left halves of the Deep State, and this is what you get. At least the left halves might simply issue stern statements instead of sending our boys to war again. Obama backed out after seeing public support for a war in Syria was at about 15%.

I suppose giving the neocons some of what they want might smooth the way for his immigration agenda--what they really care about is Israel. But--that's probably too optimistic.

What is this good for? Absolutely nothing.

You make some good points.

Trump, if you or your staffers are reading this, I hope you’ve just done this to send a message to North Korea or China, or maybe one of your family just purchased some Raytheon stock. Learn from the example of GWB, whom you repudiated.

Another voter who's shocked that a politician did what he said he wouldn't do. Didn't Obama campaign on an non-interventionist foreign policy too? I mean, who campaigns by saying "I'm gonna bomb someone as soon as I get in office!"

All that matters is that Trump does what he said he'd do on immigration. Who cares about anything else. God, I hope I never find myself in a fox hole with you cut and runners.

Hell we all remember W’s promise of a more humble foreign policy, too. And how’d that work out?

It’s gotten harder to believe Trump’s playing 3D chess, but I’m not ready to give up on him yet. I remind myself, “Would things in any way be better if Lady MacBeth was in office?” (And the answer is, of course, NO.)

Yes, they would. It would be her doing this, not our candidate. I argued IRL to a few people about how Trump wasn't so bad. I put my IRL credibility behind him. If idiotic wars need to be started, it should be Hillary who starts them. I Stand With Her.

Oh, of course Trump did very little with immigration so far. OK, he curbed somewhat illegal immigration. It'll take three years longer for US whites to become a minority, if they're lucky. Is there anything else?

Hell we all remember W's promise of a more humble foreign policy, too. And how'd that work out?

It's gotten harder to believe Trump's playing 3D chess, but I'm not ready to give up on him yet. I remind myself, "Would things in any way be better if Lady MacBeth was in office?" (And the answer is, of course, NO.)

Yes, they would. She promised to pop Syria. We knew what she was going to do, and could have relied on it, bad as it was.

President Trump just fell for a McMaster Disaster. This is Trump's second enormous, avoidable blunder.

Would anyone care to bet that Steve Bannon was banished from attending National Security Council meetings precisely because the McMaster-Deep State Neocons were licking their chops over an opportunity to throw U.S. military might against someone, something, anything in Syria?

President Trump just fell for a McMaster Disaster. This is Trump’s second enormous, avoidable blunder.

Well, the neocons bought him again. Thanks, Kushner. Here we go, war again. More American boys coming home missing arms and legs and with brain damage for the greater glory of the American Empire and Israel.

The only thing I have to add that is that he really didn't have people to fill the national-security infrastructure with. If he wants people with expertise, it's either neocons or liberals (I know, not much difference), and the neocons sound more like Republicans. Who's going to advise him on Syria, Kris Kobach? Jeff Sessions? The staff of Breitbart? Bannon reads a lot and is a very bright guy but he's not going to know the fine points of Syria and Lebanon.

Nobody with nationalist sympathies could get up through the diplomatic or national-security establishment to be ready to staff the NSC or State. So it's either the right or left halves of the Deep State, and this is what you get. At least the left halves might simply issue stern statements instead of sending our boys to war again. Obama backed out after seeing public support for a war in Syria was at about 15%.

I suppose giving the neocons some of what they want might smooth the way for his immigration agenda--what they really care about is Israel. But--that's probably too optimistic.

What is this good for? Absolutely nothing.

What is this good for? Absolutely nothing.

Trump received a rare opportunity to re-establish a certain red line, and he took it.

What’s good for nothing is Trump’s base losing its shit because of something Bill Clinton used to do to distract from sex scandals. You have the first immigration restrictionist president of the modern era and you’re ready to throw it all out because he made Putin and the Iranians a little upset today? Take a chill pill and wait to see where this goes.

It is extremely illogical for Assad to have used chemical weapons. His impact was minimal and did not actually enhance his strategic position whatsoever (did not kill enough people or cause enough damage). The only result he received was to create anger and force an attack on him which destroyed part of his precious Air Force.

I am under the impression that this move was not Assad’s doing. Unless it was a trial balloon to potentially use chemical weapons on a wide scale, I cannot fathom any intelligent actor using them under these circumstances.

Another voter who's shocked that a politician did what he said he wouldn't do. Didn't Obama campaign on an non-interventionist foreign policy too? I mean, who campaigns by saying "I'm gonna bomb someone as soon as I get in office!"

All that matters is that Trump does what he said he'd do on immigration. Who cares about anything else. God, I hope I never find myself in a fox hole with you cut and runners.

All that matters is that Trump does what he said he’d do on immigration. Who cares about anything else. God, I hope I never find myself in a fox hole with you cut and runners

How likely is it that he will keep any promises? The tweets from 2013 on Syria are priceless. Stick a fork in him, he is done. Expect Gorsuch to sell out on something soon.

Let’s build some context: Trump spent his life fighting for commercial and social legitimacy among New York Jews who would not let him into their elite country clubs and other circles in spite of Trump being a billionaire New York real estate mogul. Finally, Trump’s daughter is allowed to marry a wealthy New York Jew … but from a Jewish clan temporarily on the “out” because of the conviction of the clan’s patriarch for fraud and bribery.

So, Trump enters the political arena as a president caught between two New York Jews … his son-in-law acting as his senior advisor and New York Senator, Chuck Schumer, the Neocon leading the Democratic charge against the Trump administration — “good” Jew vs. “bad” Jew as it were. The pregnant question: Would Jared (and Trump) operate on the mantra, “What is good for Israel is good for the Jews …” or the original “America First” platform voiced by Trump during his election campaign?

Now we know. Although only 36 and without any political and foreign policy experience, Jared quickly purges the leading “Deplorables”, Mike Flynn and Steve Bannon, from the Trump administration and takes over effective control of the National Security Council. Then, as if a part of a pre-planned Jewish coup, the Trump administration quickly turns “180 degrees” in its foreign policy by joining the Neocon-sponsored anti-Russian crusade, announcing a plan for an autonomous Kurdish region in northern Syria, and attacking Syria.

The tally is in: Jews 1, Americans 0. Game over! It appears that the last presidential election was nothing more than an internal squabble between two Jewish clans in New York City. And, yes, we know they have made amends and now both support using US military power and wealth to eliminate Israel’s existential enemies in the Mideast, even if this takes us to WWIII and a nuclear exchange with Russia.

Trump enters the political arena as a president caught between two New York Jews … his son-in-law acting as his senior advisor and New York Senator, Chuck Schumer, the Neocon leading the Democratic charge against the Trump administration

A few points:

1.) As a "New York Jew" myself, I am deeply embarrassed by both Kushner as well as Schumer. At least Schmumer, as reptillian as he is, makes no claims to being an observant or Orthodox Jew. Seeing Kushner promoted is bad enough. Seeing it happen at the direct expense of Bannon losing power added much insult to the injury.

2.) Schumer a "Neocon"? He may align with the Neocons on foreign policy (as many Democrats do) but in order to be considered a neocon, doesn't one have to at least purport to be "conservative"? Last I checked, Schumer made no such claims.

3.) Throughout your post, you conflate Jews with Zionists. Not all Jews are Zionists and not all Zionists are Jews. Zionism actually violates Judaism. (Though I could hardly expect the average or typical person, Jew or non-Jew, to know that; Zionists have been frightfully successful in blurring that critical distinction. Even some otherwise great rabbis have been misled and stumbled in this area.)

Resign and cede all power to the Republican establishment and the neocons? That would be insane.

What’s the difference? They already have it. Trump just turned himself into George W Bush. He should be impeached. That’ll serve as a lesson to the rest. I mean, it’s not like you’re going to really be getting a border wall or less immigration, so why bother with this madman?

It shows that the NY Democrats in the West Wing have defeated Breitbart. I suspect this will lead to a softening in other policy areas. NY Jews tend to be against Muslims but support high performing Asian and Indian immigrants. They are neutral on Hispanics. In the long run expect some kind of sensible amnesty policy along with reasonable but not fiscally destabilizing tax cuts. Trump’s popularity will soar, but probably among people who would never vote for him. If this makes him a one term President, this would still be the greatest third act for the NY showman in the history of the country.

Possible that the chemical bombing was a false flag operation by the CIA. Who knows? But overall, I think Trump made the right move sending in the Tomahawks. It accomplishes several things:
1. Sends message to the world that Trump is more aggressive than Obama. More willing to kick some ass.
2. Sends message to Premier Xi that he is willing to use direct intervention against North Korea, so they had better step up and help fix that problem.
3. Makes KJ Un wonder how far he can go before he may be next to get the Tomahawks.
4. Confounds Dems who are chasing the Trump-Russia connection, especially when this was a move against Russian interests (Tillerson saying Russkies were insincere or inept not to know about the gassing).
5. Provokes positive feelings for Trump from those (never Trumpers) who have seen the videos of the suffering children and feel good that 'something' wasa done about it.

There are probably some other benefits. Ultimately though, Trump will never send more than a few ground troops into Syria. His bigger play in the mideast is (or should be) destabilizing Iran politically to rid that country of the crazy Mullahs.

Sends message to the world that Trump is more aggressive than Obama. More willing to kick some ass.

Sends message to the world that Trump is an eejit who falls for or follows a storyline that is transparent to anyone who has ever heard of Radio Gleiwitz.

Kick ass, what for? Tiresome dead baby pornography. US will provide its own Hellfire BBQ (sans photos) next week.

Provokes positive feelings for Trump from those (never Trumpers) who have seen the videos of the suffering children and feel good that ‘something’ wasa done about it.

You can never appease liberventionists. You must physically remove them.

It’s amazing to me how he stood up to so many relentless attacks during the past two years, and then in three months completely caved to what all his enemies wanted in the first place.

It also shows that the opposition had the wrong strategy for him all along. They should have praised and puffed him up at every opportunity. Then, if he won, he’d have done every last thing they wanted.

The "Strange New Respect" is right on schedule. I have always wondered why the Russians don't simply threaten to retaliate against Israel in response to American aggression, this would probably be the most effective way to coerce America and the global media into total acquiescence. Hell, if Putin blackmailed our elites with a nuclear threat towards Israel, they would probably let him annex half of Europe without a peep.

Putin has slapped down Netanyahoo a few times, I expect there will be retaliation; Push on peace and tooling up Hezbollah?

I keep seeing people say this is a betrayal of Trump’s base. Do you really think so? He was the rank and file military’s candidate, not to mention the Israel lovers candidate. I would think a large part of his base is thrilled by this.

The evangelical Christians always enjoy a good war. They'll be onboard.

What about the working-class voters in the Rust Belt states? Working-class voters are notoriously gullible when politicians start thumping the patriotic drum.

The big losers will be the alt-right. They're about to be thrown under the bus. They're no longer needed.

The thing about politicians who practise the gentle art of betrayal is that they usually thrive. Look at Churchill. Betrayal works.

The evangelical Christians always enjoy a good war. They’ll be onboard.

Exactly. These people have marinated in enough pro-Israel Chuck Norris films and Left Behind books that they’re happy to see the Christians of the Middle East wiped off the map so long as Bibi has still got a grin on his face.

The thing about politicians who practise the gentle art of betrayal is that they usually thrive. Look at Churchill. Betrayal works.

De Gaulle proved it too when he told the French in Algeria “I have understood you” and then left them with “the suitcase or the coffin” as their options a few years later. That’s where the Front National comes from, not the Vichy regime. Will Trump rack up enough betrayals to spawn an American Jean-Marie Le Pen with his own Front National?

Under Obama, we did a fair amount of it in Yemen and Somalia. One weekend Obama bombed 5 countries and didn't get a single headline.

good point…nevertheless when Obama bombed Syria he dropped them on rebels not the Assad regime. Attacking the Assad regime directly, as Trump just did, creates a new set of problems. There were Russians at the base the US struck, thus Putin is outraged at this act of aggression.

Trump was very foolish to listen to the neocons and getting rid of Bannon is not a good sign. Why would he trust the intelligence operatives , knowing they are liars who are are working to undermine his administration and embarrass Trump..I doubt very much that Assad was behind the gas attacks, if they were actually gas attacks.

hopefully Trump does not escalate this military action and try to depose Assad. Very foolish action by Trump, he gains little political support and lost millions of his base.

I think Trump should be removed from office. We're not going to get a wall or an immigration moratorium anyway, so why tolerate an impulsive buffoon who'll put the world in jeopardy on a whim? He didn't even wait for an investigation to be completed. Now, he's spinning it as "launched quickly for the element of surprise." What a liar! He acted impulsively because he's an idiot who can't think for himself and now he's spinning his way out of it.

MANY people voted for him because they wished to avoid exactly what he just did. He ignored them and committed an act of war while also violating international law and the constitution. He needs to go and Sessions needs to be questioned on whether or not he advised Trump on the legality of this action. If he said it was legal, he also needs to go.

Trump has proved that he'll betray his base without thought. During the election, he was a symbol of resistance against political correctness and anti-white racism, but that's all he was. He wasn't what people really wanted him to be. He says "buy American" but appointed a Goldman Sachs guy as economic adviser. He said Iraq was a mistake but seems willing to repeat it with Syria. He embarrasses us on Twitter. He demoted Bannon. He said "drain the swamp" but filled it with unqualified cronies and family members. He was nothing but a charlatan all along.

In my opinion, the Russians have no choice but to retaliate in some fashion, otherwise Putin is DOA. That's a dangerous situation...all caused by this idiot. I've also read a report that is speculating that the US is hacking North Korean missiles and causing them to fail. He strikes me as very dangerous. Maybe Pence would be more even handed.

I don’t have time to write a reply right now, but I completely agree with this post.

Russians reporting the runways were undamaged by the strike. Russians are spinning this as American military ineffectiveness, seems way more likely we missed on purpose. For several hundred thousand apiece, a Tomahawk missile can’t make a critical hit on a fucking runway in the middle of nowhere?

Indeed, a Cruise Missile is supposed to be able to walk down a chimney stack and piss on the rug in front of the fireplace. I don't know whether they still rely on the terrain-mapping capabilities upgraded from the 80s as now GPS is online.

several hundred thousand apiece

"According to the US Department of Defence's annual budget, a single Tomahawk missile costs $1.59 million." (http://finance.nine.com.au/2017/04/07/15/09/how-much-a-tomahawk-missile-costs) That would be sans storage, maintenance and delivery services.

With that many tomahawks fired and that much runway, it seems the only way we missed runway is if we were very *on* target, not off as Russia claims. Out of 59 ineffective tomahawks, at least one would land on some runway if it was off target.

You can put some craters in a runway but it is just a bunch of concrete that can be repaired pretty quickly. It would be more effective in shutting down Syrian airpower to destroy Syria's limited, very expensive (by their standards) aircraft and support facilities (radar, hangars, etc.).

As a retired military officer, I offer that the current US military is functionally incompetent. Nothing works anymore ... as might be expected in a PC environment that insists on "political correctness" over reality across the spectrum of manpower (oops, people power), weapons, tactics, and strategy. The F-35 is a premier example of illusion trumping reality.

I believe it when the Russian called the Tomohawk strikes ineffective with a large number of missiles not reaching their targets. This has become an expectation when dealing with the US military.

The same thing happened to the Byzantines in the nadir of the Roman Empire ... politicized generals leading politicized armies and carrying out politicized strategies. Outnumbered 10 to 1, the barbarians won every time.

Well, the neocons bought him again. Thanks, Kushner. Here we go, war again. More American boys coming home missing arms and legs and with brain damage for the greater glory of the American Empire and Israel.

The only thing I have to add that is that he really didn't have people to fill the national-security infrastructure with. If he wants people with expertise, it's either neocons or liberals (I know, not much difference), and the neocons sound more like Republicans. Who's going to advise him on Syria, Kris Kobach? Jeff Sessions? The staff of Breitbart? Bannon reads a lot and is a very bright guy but he's not going to know the fine points of Syria and Lebanon.

Nobody with nationalist sympathies could get up through the diplomatic or national-security establishment to be ready to staff the NSC or State. So it's either the right or left halves of the Deep State, and this is what you get. At least the left halves might simply issue stern statements instead of sending our boys to war again. Obama backed out after seeing public support for a war in Syria was at about 15%.

I suppose giving the neocons some of what they want might smooth the way for his immigration agenda--what they really care about is Israel. But--that's probably too optimistic.

What is this good for? Absolutely nothing.

The traditional solution for having no one you can trust is to import foreigners. I don’t suppose we could steal Fumio Kishida? If he doesn’t speak English or isn’t qualified, we can just outsource the state department to the Kremlin or the PRC. It would solve the problem of a drive for war nicely.

My impression of Iran is a bunch of young people who would be openly drinking alcohol tomorrow if the old clerics who took power in the late 1970′s were to disappear. Never been there so I’m happy to be proved wrong.

I've never been there either but I've read Khamenei's website for years, even when it was basically a text file. He comes across as grandfatherly and concerned for the well being of Iranians. His views aren't mine and of course the youth as always prone to be seduced, but I've also read young Iranians say the restrictions make partying more fun and they want them to stay so they have that safety net when they grow up & raise kids.

The timing is specious- Susan Rice, Xi, North Korea, St. Petersburg subway.

But the important thing is not the veracity of the evidence around WMD. The important thing is that, for the first time in history, a black man and a woman presented the evidence at the United Nations on behalf of the United States of America. We should all applaud the significance of that, regardless of the consequences.

The cool kids at treehouse and other places are saying OK Trump knew it was a false flag but calculated the benefits of this strike and decided it solved so many problems at once that he gave it the go ahead anyway.

So why wouldn't the false flag perps do it again? The sickos might decide now is the time to stage a truly spectacular and gruesome operation. And what is Trump's move then?

Seems like now the stage is set for the real chess move. Maybe another much larger false flag outside of Syria carried out by an angry supporter of Assad.

....

Good call.

I’ve been saying that for months – despite being a shrewd man, Trump has no idea just how hard the Deep State pushes for war. He has no idea about what happens to presidents who resist the siren song to “let slip the dogs of war”.

Russians reporting the runways were undamaged by the strike. Russians are spinning this as American military ineffectiveness, seems way more likely we missed on purpose. For several hundred thousand apiece, a Tomahawk missile can't make a critical hit on a fucking runway in the middle of nowhere?

http://imgur.com/a/1VQq3

https://www.rt.com/news/383858-syria-us-strike-inefficient/

The strike on the Shayrat airfield in Syria’s Homs Province destroyed a material storage depot, a training facility, a canteen, six MiG-23 aircraft in repair hangars and a radar station.

The runway, taxiways and the Syrian aircraft on the parking apron remained undamaged, Russia’s Defense Ministry spokesman said in a statement.

Curioser and curioser.

Indeed, a Cruise Missile is supposed to be able to walk down a chimney stack and piss on the rug in front of the fireplace. I don’t know whether they still rely on the terrain-mapping capabilities upgraded from the 80s as now GPS is online.

Well, the neocons bought him again. Thanks, Kushner. Here we go, war again. More American boys coming home missing arms and legs and with brain damage for the greater glory of the American Empire and Israel.

The only thing I have to add that is that he really didn't have people to fill the national-security infrastructure with. If he wants people with expertise, it's either neocons or liberals (I know, not much difference), and the neocons sound more like Republicans. Who's going to advise him on Syria, Kris Kobach? Jeff Sessions? The staff of Breitbart? Bannon reads a lot and is a very bright guy but he's not going to know the fine points of Syria and Lebanon.

Nobody with nationalist sympathies could get up through the diplomatic or national-security establishment to be ready to staff the NSC or State. So it's either the right or left halves of the Deep State, and this is what you get. At least the left halves might simply issue stern statements instead of sending our boys to war again. Obama backed out after seeing public support for a war in Syria was at about 15%.

I suppose giving the neocons some of what they want might smooth the way for his immigration agenda--what they really care about is Israel. But--that's probably too optimistic.

What is this good for? Absolutely nothing.

“Obama backed out after seeing public support for a war in Syria was at about 15%”

That’s why Trump is so dangerous. He’ll see that 15% and completely ignore it.

This debacle is a direct result of our negligence in failing to promptly hang the chiselers who lied us into Iraq. Though many believe the foreign policy establishment are incorrigible, I am quite sure that a row of corpses swinging from a hastily-built gallows on the National Mall would have done wonders to re-orient their priorities. If you find public hanging too gruesome, blindfolds and a pockmarked wall would have served equally well.

If this is a one off rather than policy, this is not that big a deal. Reports indicate Russia was warned well in advance to remove their personnel, and statements from them indicate they no longer are giving Assad full support.

If however this is the first move in a ground war or more extensive military action in Syria, it’s a disaster. Would go against everything Candidate Trump’s sensibly said President Trump would not do. Further he had no Congressional authorization for this;’ he is walking into an impeachment trap should he go any further . For 3 decades our foreign policy has been dictated but what ever heart-wrenching video cable networks can show to pull at our heartstrings without concern for the cost in American blood and lucre.

For Israel? Is Israel pushing for a resolution to the Syria issue? Seems to me they've been enjoying watching their enemies kill each other. Plus, they get to hop across the border and bomb Hezbollah every now and then, and no one has the ability to do anything about it. Syria is a situation where the Iranians, the Assads and Hezbollah are fighting Al Qaeda, ISIS and Hamas. Why would Israel want to stop that? None of the refugees are going into Israel. None of the fighting has been aimed at Israel. And if Syria breaks up, there is less pressure for Israel to give up the Golan Heights.

I voted for America First but got war, Ivanka and Jared instead. Completely distraught by this Trump move. And combined with news that Bannon is in danger of being banished, this is turning out to be an epic disaster.

First thought: the US tipped off the Russians who, surely, tipped off the Syrians. Not much actual damage done.

1. A token display of force to divert his increasingly unhinged critics. Leverage with Russia in advance of Tillerson’s trip as they negotiate Assad’s exit and joint plan on squashing the cockroaches.

2. The bored generals and You-Know-Who’s finally got to him and it’s off to war and endless occupation of yet another country that deeply resents us. Billions to bomb them, billions to rebuild them. More immigrants, and more Muslims with a grudge.

The problem with 1 is, who do you put in power in the Big Man’s place? Syria is a snakepit and the Assads have spent so much time consolidating power that there’s nobody competent outside their circle left. Does anybody know ANYONE in Syria ready to step up to the plate? Or does the CIA have some gray-haired guy on ice in a Northern Virginia suburb ready to roll out, who’ll have to hire US mercs because he can’t trust his own countrymen?

I just don’t see how you implement 1 without it leading to 2.

I’m paused at grey-pill for now. But immigration was the issue that swept him into power (via the Electoral College) and he doesn’t seem to be doing much on it. And now he’s bit into something that could occupy his time 24/7 if he let it (like the perplexed LBJ with Vietnam).

So he's a coward who can't stand the heat and will break under pressure? Either that or he lacks the knowledge and is too inarticulate to fight back. That's not the kind of person I want as my president. In any case, he's turned many of his supporters into former supporters with his actions and rhetoric. If this is politically motivated, he's not a very good politician.

"The bored generals and You-Know-Who’s finally got to him and it’s off to war and endless occupation of yet another country that deeply resents us. "

All too true. I've heard Trump has the attention span of a gnat. Makes sense.

"I’m paused at grey-pill for now. But immigration was the issue that swept him into power (via the Electoral College) and he doesn’t seem to be doing much on it. And now he’s bit into something that could occupy his time 24/7 if he let it (like the perplexed LBJ with Vietnam)."

As soon as people realize that, his approval rating will be in the 20s. Wait for it. The only reason it wasn't already was due to the fanatical support of his core...much of which has been betrayed on multiple issues now. It's just a matter of time before they work up the hatred to tell posters they disapprove.

The problem with 1 is, who do you put in power in the Big Man’s place? Syria is a snakepit and the Assads have spent so much time consolidating power that there’s nobody competent outside their circle left. Does anybody know ANYONE in Syria ready to step up to the plate? Or does the CIA have some gray-haired guy on ice in a Northern Virginia suburb ready to roll out, who’ll have to hire US mercs because he can’t trust his own countrymen?

It's not a question of competence. It's a question of legitimacy, as in whether the factions around Assad are willing to accept some other guy in his place. Not because they think Assad is any great shakes (and indeed, each of these faction leaders probably covets the throne for himself), but because the consensus there is that some version of the divine right of kings and primogeniture is an acceptable way to choose a leader, and Assad, as the hand-picked, non-imbecile son of the previous king, Hafez, fits the bill. The moment some other guy is put on the throne, all bets are off, and you get the Roman situation where the elites fought major civil wars to decide who would get to rule. Which the ruling Alawites can't really afford, given that the Alawite fighting age population has lost, on a proportional basis, 15x what the US lost during WWII.

How the hell is Putin, Xi Jinping, or anyone else going to trust Trump to hold any sort of agreement with them if they know he's one propaganda campaign away from flipping overnight on positions he's held and defended for years?

They'd have to be mad to put any faith in Trump after this. This "show of strength" was really a show of weakness. It showed them Trump is a weak fool who is unable to resist neocon influence and maintain control of his own foreign policy.

Expect Russia and China to hunker down and double down on their cooperation against us now.

The "Strange New Respect" is right on schedule. I have always wondered why the Russians don't simply threaten to retaliate against Israel in response to American aggression, this would probably be the most effective way to coerce America and the global media into total acquiescence. Hell, if Putin blackmailed our elites with a nuclear threat towards Israel, they would probably let him annex half of Europe without a peep.

Hitler threatened US Jews with retaliation against European Jews if US is pushed into war. It didn’t work, because there’s no secret Jewish cabal. It only made Jews feel even more hostility to Hitler. To the extent that Jews pushed the US into war against Hitler (and it’s not impossible the US would’ve entered without them), Hitler’s threats only made them more anti-Hitler. Same thing would happen if Putin threatened Israel.

Philip Giraldi, former CIA officer and Director of the Council for the National Interest, says that “military and intelligence personnel,” “intimately familiar” with the intelligence, say that the narrative that Assad or Russia did it is a “sham,” instead endorsing the Russian narrative that Assad’s forces had bombed a storage facility. Giraldi’s intelligence sources are “astonished” about the government and media narrative and are considering going public out of concern over the danger of worse war there. Giraldi also observes that the Assad regime had no motive to do such a thing at this time.

Well, the neocons bought him again. Thanks, Kushner. Here we go, war again. More American boys coming home missing arms and legs and with brain damage for the greater glory of the American Empire and Israel.

The only thing I have to add that is that he really didn't have people to fill the national-security infrastructure with. If he wants people with expertise, it's either neocons or liberals (I know, not much difference), and the neocons sound more like Republicans. Who's going to advise him on Syria, Kris Kobach? Jeff Sessions? The staff of Breitbart? Bannon reads a lot and is a very bright guy but he's not going to know the fine points of Syria and Lebanon.

Nobody with nationalist sympathies could get up through the diplomatic or national-security establishment to be ready to staff the NSC or State. So it's either the right or left halves of the Deep State, and this is what you get. At least the left halves might simply issue stern statements instead of sending our boys to war again. Obama backed out after seeing public support for a war in Syria was at about 15%.

I suppose giving the neocons some of what they want might smooth the way for his immigration agenda--what they really care about is Israel. But--that's probably too optimistic.

What is this good for? Absolutely nothing.

The war profiteers, Deep State operatives, and neocons are running foreign policy in the Trump administration. Just like they’ve run foreign policy in every recent administration, especially from Bush onward.

1. JFK – He ended up assassinated, supposedly by a guy (Oswald) who also was assassinated by another guy (Ruby) shortly afterward. Ruby would later claim LBJ did it and he was being kept from speaking the truth by a conspiracy. Years later, JFK’s brother ended up assassinated by a guy (Sirhan Sirhan) who’s mentally incapacitated and can barely talk.
2. Carter – His presidency was undone by Iran taking American hostages. Right after Reagan was inaugurated, the hostages were released. Then the new administration sold arms to Iran illegally (Iran-Contra).

How about nationalizing weapons manufacture industry and eliminating for-profit privatized military contracting?

Most of the military industrial complex products are simple enough for the govt to make themselves. Innovation can and will always be costly.... so pay big sums to the smart innovators themselves via high salaries or purchasing blueprints that mad geniuses draw up.

The current system enriches globalist corporations with constant incentive for new war, with no end in sight.

I wouldn’t be too quick to pronounce the eulogy. Trump was always an imperfect ambassador for America Firstism. Better than Hillary, but very impetuous and unrooted. Surely there is another leader out there who is more ideologically grounded than Trump who could pick up the banner.

The "Strange New Respect" is right on schedule. I have always wondered why the Russians don't simply threaten to retaliate against Israel in response to American aggression, this would probably be the most effective way to coerce America and the global media into total acquiescence. Hell, if Putin blackmailed our elites with a nuclear threat towards Israel, they would probably let him annex half of Europe without a peep.

The Russians won’t do that, becausse contrary to popular belief, Putin is extremely cautious, to the point of fault. The boldest thing he ever did was the takeover of Crimea, and he was even reluctant to do that. In hindsight, he probably should have gone ahead and taken the Donbas. The opportunity for that has probably passed.

Russians reporting the runways were undamaged by the strike. Russians are spinning this as American military ineffectiveness, seems way more likely we missed on purpose. For several hundred thousand apiece, a Tomahawk missile can't make a critical hit on a fucking runway in the middle of nowhere?

http://imgur.com/a/1VQq3

https://www.rt.com/news/383858-syria-us-strike-inefficient/

The strike on the Shayrat airfield in Syria’s Homs Province destroyed a material storage depot, a training facility, a canteen, six MiG-23 aircraft in repair hangars and a radar station.

The runway, taxiways and the Syrian aircraft on the parking apron remained undamaged, Russia’s Defense Ministry spokesman said in a statement.

Russian S400 and S300 downed more than half, some no doubt missed.

Don’t see the likeable Don Jr in the White House, nor Eric. Kushner family is very dodgy.

US troops, if they stay around Raqqa long term, will make nice target practice in the inevitable insurgency.

My impression of Iran is a bunch of young people who would be openly drinking alcohol tomorrow if the old clerics who took power in the late 1970's were to disappear. Never been there so I'm happy to be proved wrong.

I’ve never been there either but I’ve read Khamenei’s website for years, even when it was basically a text file. He comes across as grandfatherly and concerned for the well being of Iranians. His views aren’t mine and of course the youth as always prone to be seduced, but I’ve also read young Iranians say the restrictions make partying more fun and they want them to stay so they have that safety net when they grow up & raise kids.

Hell we all remember W's promise of a more humble foreign policy, too. And how'd that work out?

It's gotten harder to believe Trump's playing 3D chess, but I'm not ready to give up on him yet. I remind myself, "Would things in any way be better if Lady MacBeth was in office?" (And the answer is, of course, NO.)

“Would things in any way be better if Lady MacBeth was in office?”

Yes, they would. It would be her doing this, not our candidate. I argued IRL to a few people about how Trump wasn’t so bad. I put my IRL credibility behind him. If idiotic wars need to be started, it should be Hillary who starts them. I Stand With Her.

Oh, of course Trump did very little with immigration so far. OK, he curbed somewhat illegal immigration. It’ll take three years longer for US whites to become a minority, if they’re lucky. Is there anything else?

I argued IRL to a few people about how Trump wasn’t so bad. I put my IRL credibility behind him

I think there are more than a few non-interventionist types across the US sphere who are in that position. Justin Raimondo at antiwar.com for one. Also many who aren't particularly opposed to military action but see it as misguided when it is aimed at the enemies of jihadists.

Trump I'm sure doesn't understand the damage he has done in those areas, nor would he think it's important if he did. He will just assume he'll pick up other supporters amongst the "humanitarian" interventionists and neocons.

We'll wait to see who bothers to stand up for him when they hang him out to dry, now.

First thought: the US tipped off the Russians who, surely, tipped off the Syrians. Not much actual damage done.

1. A token display of force to divert his increasingly unhinged critics. Leverage with Russia in advance of Tillerson's trip as they negotiate Assad's exit and joint plan on squashing the cockroaches.

2. The bored generals and You-Know-Who's finally got to him and it's off to war and endless occupation of yet another country that deeply resents us. Billions to bomb them, billions to rebuild them. More immigrants, and more Muslims with a grudge.

The problem with 1 is, who do you put in power in the Big Man's place? Syria is a snakepit and the Assads have spent so much time consolidating power that there's nobody competent outside their circle left. Does anybody know ANYONE in Syria ready to step up to the plate? Or does the CIA have some gray-haired guy on ice in a Northern Virginia suburb ready to roll out, who'll have to hire US mercs because he can't trust his own countrymen?

I just don't see how you implement 1 without it leading to 2.

I'm paused at grey-pill for now. But immigration was the issue that swept him into power (via the Electoral College) and he doesn't seem to be doing much on it. And now he's bit into something that could occupy his time 24/7 if he let it (like the perplexed LBJ with Vietnam).

“First thought: the US tipped off the Russians who, surely, tipped off the Syrians. Not much actual damage done.”

Maybe they didn’t attack the airfield because they want to use it themselves when they follow through on Trump’s threat to end the bloodshed in Syria (by invading it).

So he’s a coward who can’t stand the heat and will break under pressure? Either that or he lacks the knowledge and is too inarticulate to fight back. That’s not the kind of person I want as my president. In any case, he’s turned many of his supporters into former supporters with his actions and rhetoric. If this is politically motivated, he’s not a very good politician.

“The bored generals and You-Know-Who’s finally got to him and it’s off to war and endless occupation of yet another country that deeply resents us. ”

All too true. I’ve heard Trump has the attention span of a gnat. Makes sense.

“I’m paused at grey-pill for now. But immigration was the issue that swept him into power (via the Electoral College) and he doesn’t seem to be doing much on it. And now he’s bit into something that could occupy his time 24/7 if he let it (like the perplexed LBJ with Vietnam).”

As soon as people realize that, his approval rating will be in the 20s. Wait for it. The only reason it wasn’t already was due to the fanatical support of his core…much of which has been betrayed on multiple issues now. It’s just a matter of time before they work up the hatred to tell posters they disapprove.

Because of the ugly photos of dead children Trump has to go create some orphans as a sort of balance? The media are in a war fever in their coverage demanding more. Their true colors are coming out now as they scream for blood. Meanwhile the Russians have exited their agreement with the US that was designed to avoid air clashes so that’s a worrying unknown. People like Tillerson and Kushner are businessmen by background with little foreign policy experience while Haley is a ranting gasbag. None of these people seem qualified to give advice. Is this attack a onetime thing or does it mean more is to come?

Possible that the chemical bombing was a false flag operation by the CIA. Who knows? But overall, I think Trump made the right move sending in the Tomahawks. It accomplishes several things:
1. Sends message to the world that Trump is more aggressive than Obama. More willing to kick some ass.
2. Sends message to Premier Xi that he is willing to use direct intervention against North Korea, so they had better step up and help fix that problem.
3. Makes KJ Un wonder how far he can go before he may be next to get the Tomahawks.
4. Confounds Dems who are chasing the Trump-Russia connection, especially when this was a move against Russian interests (Tillerson saying Russkies were insincere or inept not to know about the gassing).
5. Provokes positive feelings for Trump from those (never Trumpers) who have seen the videos of the suffering children and feel good that 'something' wasa done about it.

There are probably some other benefits. Ultimately though, Trump will never send more than a few ground troops into Syria. His bigger play in the mideast is (or should be) destabilizing Iran politically to rid that country of the crazy Mullahs.

I don’t even think Trump is in charge any more.

I can’t imagine a picture of a wounded child would make him flip flop so completely. And it isn’t even certain that Assad committed these alleged attacks yet.

I honestly think he is being threatened or blackmailed in some way. I don’t see any other explanation for what is happening right now.

Arnaldo Claudio, a retired senior US Military Police officer, discusses his 2005 investigation of human rights abuses of detainees in Tal Afar, in a camp commanded by then-Colonel H.R. McMaster, whom Claudio threatened to arrest. According to Claudio, detainees were kept in overcrowded conditions, handcuffed, deprived of food and water, and soiled by their own urine and feces. A so-called “good behavior program” was implemented by McMaster, that held detainees indefinitely (beyond a rule requiring release after 2 weeks) unless they provided “actionable intelligence.”

Moscow was warned of the airstrikes in advance, and no Russian forces or equipment were hit in the strike. There were reports that senior Syrian officers also evacuated the base. (reads like a reality tv)

The establishment is making a statement to the unwashed masses: It doesn't matter who you elect. We always win.

One hundred years ago – almost to the day – the United States entered WWI, sending us down the path to global empire while remaining a republic at home.

Around 50 years ago, we decided to turn a relatively homogeneous, prosperous nation into a multi-racial, multi-ethnic conglomerate and to adopt the national religion I call The Cult of Equality.

Now, we are witnessing the end of the Republic.

Trump was our last chance, as slim as it was. He had the money and arrogance to take on the establishment. He is failing us. There will not another politician who doesn’t need other people’s money or who is willing to get eviscerated in the press day after day.

Unless Trump start acting on immigration soon, we can list this time as the point where we knew for certain that the country was lost.

This is a thread with which I am in agreement with 95% of you people. I am really disappointed with this guy. I am wavering between “he has already been threatened by the Deep State” or “he is a smart guy with no wisdom”.

Though we all knew that Trump didn’t have a deep knowledge of history and politics like a Pat Buchanan, he almost always seemed to let his instincts steer him the right way – not just picking Jeff Sessions for AG, but talking to him early on in the campaign to get good knowledge of the immigration problem. On the 2nd amendment he came around from being one of the few, big shots in NY City who could bear arms or have body guards, and hell with the little guy, to a man who got the earliest endorsement by the NRA ever (?) – course, running against the Hildabeast, I guess that last is no big feat.

Even so, I really thought this guy was smart. Maybe he is, but he needs to get back to his roots now!

Lastly, as I wrote under the Buchanan post about N. Korea, along with the fact that this Syria war has no bearing on the defense of the US of A, this country is beyond broke at this point! Does this former captain of industry not know the financial situation? (He did seem to, in a speech in S. Florida during the campaign that I cannot find). We have no real money to make war around the world – this is all borrowed, and someone will pay one way or another – taxation of your grandchildren, or more likely, default or hyperinflation causing great financial pain.

We had a chance to have Ron Paul and the American public rejected him. We have the broken system we have of politics+corporations+media and there is no dismantling it apparently. Just a slow, sinking decay.

We will end with a whimper, not a bang. Too many fat, celebrity worshippers who don't care about their people or land.

Yes, I'm noting a serious lack of measured voices as well. I think it's good that Trump supporters want to hold him accountable, but many of the reactions above are overwrought.

There is lots of room between buffoon and 7D chess.

I found the different reactions of Vox Day and the Dilbert guy interesting.
https://voxday.blogspot.com/2017/04/blunder-or-complete-debacle.html?m=1
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/159300836386/the-syrian-air-base-attack

I feel numb, hopeless, and a fool that I bothered voting for Trump. It’s now obvious that he is just another stooge for the Zionists and neocons who really run this country. I wonder if there is any way to let him know how disgusted his base is and if so whether he’d alter this insanity in response.

The USA has been and continues to be a cat’s paw for Israel’s belligerent and genocidal foreign policy.The USA has now become for all practical purposes an ally of ISIS in Syria. We are dangerously close to a military confrontation with Russia. The only ultimate beneficiaries this mess are Israel and the terminally corrupt dictatorships ruling Saudi Arabia and the other Arab Gulf States, and their benefits are illusory and temporary at best.

If the universe is truly just then someday soon Israel will be reduced to a pile of smoldering, nuclear slag and all the neocons and Zionists in the USA who’ve acted as her agents will be exiled there as war criminals.

I’m definitely disappointed by this, and I’ll admit it doesn’t look good. Still, this is only one incident and the first real disappointment of his presidency. Add to that the reports that Russia was notified in advance and you have some evidence that there was a deliberate effort to avoid the WWWIII escalation some fear.

Still, despair accomplishes nothing. I’ll be willing to call Trump a fraud when he orders a full invasion of Syria and calls Putin a threat to civilization. Until then, I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

I understand why so many are upset by this; I too voted for Trump as a “peace president.” Nevertheless, its disheartening to see so many willing to write him off as a puppet. Nothing wrong with telling him and the world that you think this was a bad move, but I think Trump has earned a little bit of faith.

Trump is only human, but let’s not forget he played a difficult game and managed to kill the two biggest and best funded political dynasties with no prior political experience. It’s possible there’s a long-game we aren’t seeing; it’s possible Trump made a dumb decision and will reconsider after seeing how his supporters and people like Coulter are reacting; it’s possible he’ll smell a rat when he realizes all the Democrats and Neocons are applauding this. Let’s see what happens next before giving up on him.

An amazing flip flop in an incredibly short amount of time. Can anyone name another instance where an administration went from saying they weren't worried about a guy to bombing him in so short a time frame? What, a week at most?This is the most worrisome trait of Trump's: how fast he can change his mind.

You have to wonder why Assad would do this. Things seemed to be going his way. The NYT has an article up speculating about his motives, which seems to boil down to "He thought he could get away with it", which doesn't seem convincing. But then again none of us are experts on Assad, so who knows?

The attack on Syria doesn't make a nationalist feel good, coming so soon on the heels of Bannon being kicked off the NSC. On the other hand, our involvement may not escalate beyond this. It'll be interesting to see what Russia does. Either way I don't think it's the end of the world, or that it means Trump completely sold out. Wait and see.

Don’t assume that what happened was a chemical attack by Assad. We don’t know what happened yet. Experts should be sent to investigate the area.

It hasn’t been proven that the incident in Ghouta in 2013 was caused by Assad. Some reports suggest that the rebels did it.

Possible that the chemical bombing was a false flag operation by the CIA. Who knows? But overall, I think Trump made the right move sending in the Tomahawks. It accomplishes several things:
1. Sends message to the world that Trump is more aggressive than Obama. More willing to kick some ass.
2. Sends message to Premier Xi that he is willing to use direct intervention against North Korea, so they had better step up and help fix that problem.
3. Makes KJ Un wonder how far he can go before he may be next to get the Tomahawks.
4. Confounds Dems who are chasing the Trump-Russia connection, especially when this was a move against Russian interests (Tillerson saying Russkies were insincere or inept not to know about the gassing).
5. Provokes positive feelings for Trump from those (never Trumpers) who have seen the videos of the suffering children and feel good that 'something' wasa done about it.

There are probably some other benefits. Ultimately though, Trump will never send more than a few ground troops into Syria. His bigger play in the mideast is (or should be) destabilizing Iran politically to rid that country of the crazy Mullahs.

3) Reminds KJ Un and North Korean government exactly why they want a nuclear deterant.

Yes, they would. It would be her doing this, not our candidate. I argued IRL to a few people about how Trump wasn't so bad. I put my IRL credibility behind him. If idiotic wars need to be started, it should be Hillary who starts them. I Stand With Her.

Oh, of course Trump did very little with immigration so far. OK, he curbed somewhat illegal immigration. It'll take three years longer for US whites to become a minority, if they're lucky. Is there anything else?

I argued IRL to a few people about how Trump wasn’t so bad. I put my IRL credibility behind him

I think there are more than a few non-interventionist types across the US sphere who are in that position. Justin Raimondo at antiwar.com for one. Also many who aren’t particularly opposed to military action but see it as misguided when it is aimed at the enemies of jihadists.

Trump I’m sure doesn’t understand the damage he has done in those areas, nor would he think it’s important if he did. He will just assume he’ll pick up other supporters amongst the “humanitarian” interventionists and neocons.

We’ll wait to see who bothers to stand up for him when they hang him out to dry, now.

Maybe Pipes realised that it's no longer necessary to propagandise the population on intervention, they've all been trained to know the wars will keep coming, like the rain. So he can get onto discrediting Trump and nationalism as potential threats. Seriously, there are teenagers alive today who've known nothing else but the US at war in the middle east.

They don't even have to lie any more. It don't matter; none of this matters.

A victory by either side would be equally undesirable for the United States. At this point, a prolonged stalemate is the only outcome that would not be damaging to American interests.

Indeed, it would be disastrous if President Bashar al-Assad's regime were to emerge victorious after fully suppressing the rebellion and restoring its control over the entire country. Iranian money, weapons and operatives and Hezbollah troops have become key factors in the fighting, and Mr. Assad's triumph would dramatically affirm the power and prestige of Shiite Iran and Hezbollah, its Lebanon-based proxy — posing a direct threat both to the Sunni Arab states and to Israel.

But a rebel victory would also be extremely dangerous for the United States and for many of its allies in Europe and the Middle East. That's because extremist groups, some identified with Al Qaeda, have become the most effective fighting force in Syria. If those rebel groups manage to win, they would almost certainly try to form a government hostile to the United States. Moreover, Israel could not expect tranquility on its northern border if the jihadis were to triumph in Syria. …

a decisive outcome for either side would be unacceptable for the United States. An Iranian-backed restoration of the Assad regime would increase Iran's power and status across the entire Middle East, while a victory by the extremist-dominated rebels would inaugurate another wave of Al Qaeda terrorism. There is only one outcome that the United States can possibly favor: an indefinite draw. By tying down Mr. Assad's army and its Iranian and Hezbollah allies in a war against Al Qaeda-aligned extremist fighters, four of Washington's enemies will be engaged in war among themselves and prevented from attacking Americans or America's allies. That this is now the best option is unfortunate, indeed tragic, but favoring it is not a cruel imposition on the people of Syria, because a great majority of them are facing exactly the same predicament.

Trump’s Luck was only a thing back when it looked like he was actually going to do something about it. If he can be convinced to attack Syria based on a picture, don’t you think he can be convinced to let in more refugees based on the same?

Like this was supposed to be an act of pure altruism? Now watch the tragedy unfold.

I have got to think we did this for Israel. As if Hamas and Hezbollah were a mortal threat.

We do a favor for a friend, like we did in Iraq, and look at the consequences. What was that line from Washington's farewell address? Or was it Hamilton in Federalist Papers?

For Israel? Is Israel pushing for a resolution to the Syria issue? Seems to me they’ve been enjoying watching their enemies kill each other. Plus, they get to hop across the border and bomb Hezbollah every now and then, and no one has the ability to do anything about it. Syria is a situation where the Iranians, the Assads and Hezbollah are fighting Al Qaeda, ISIS and Hamas. Why would Israel want to stop that? None of the refugees are going into Israel. None of the fighting has been aimed at Israel. And if Syria breaks up, there is less pressure for Israel to give up the Golan Heights.

And, if Trump really believes for even one second that having a splendid little war over the remnants of most civilized segment of Arab populace is a small price to pay in exchange for Trump’s Beautiful Great Society & Wall, his political putzery is…sad.

Bored Prediction:
The very same sociopoliticalpathic mighty dozen or two that will order klezmorim bend to entertain ecstatic attendees on Trump’s 2020 2018. premature political funeral is now in full control of the White House.

An amazing flip flop in an incredibly short amount of time. Can anyone name another instance where an administration went from saying they weren't worried about a guy to bombing him in so short a time frame? What, a week at most?This is the most worrisome trait of Trump's: how fast he can change his mind.

You have to wonder why Assad would do this. Things seemed to be going his way. The NYT has an article up speculating about his motives, which seems to boil down to "He thought he could get away with it", which doesn't seem convincing. But then again none of us are experts on Assad, so who knows?

The attack on Syria doesn't make a nationalist feel good, coming so soon on the heels of Bannon being kicked off the NSC. On the other hand, our involvement may not escalate beyond this. It'll be interesting to see what Russia does. Either way I don't think it's the end of the world, or that it means Trump completely sold out. Wait and see.

It would be very strange for Assad to have used chemical weapons on a bunch of civilians and beautiful babies. No doubt that Assad is an evil enough asshole to do this but why use chemical weapons? Conventional bombs would work just as well. Assad knows that if America intervenes, it will be against him. So if Assad is rational at all, he wants to keep the U.S. from intervening. But Assad should have been happy that Trump was elected because Trump appeared to be, at a minimum, very reluctant to get involved in Syria. From Obama’s red line incident, Assad should know that using chemical weapons increases the chance of U.S. intervention. It would at least make a bunch of politicians, including some bigwigs in the President’s own party like McCain, scream for a U.S. response. Why provoke the U.S.? Assad has been killing people for years. Everybody here was talking about so-called Russian hacking, immigration, etc. Not Syria. Why make Syria an issue in the U.S. and possibly cause the U.S. to intervene? Assad could have done it but he’s really stupid if he did. I’m not an expert but it doesn’t seem like he’s stupid.

Contrary to Chance The Bomber’s Neoconstructivism, Putin’s art of the deal with China is big and beautiful exercise of Holochess Mastery ;

Once transactions of oil deals start happening in rubble/ yuan/rial/rupee or gold, there will be no Tomahawk in the world that would prevent financial sandstorms from ravaging Gulf’s petro$-medieval principalities.

For good.

Unfortunately, it will be game over for US as well; unless some wannabee-strong looking president doesn’t decide to start undeclared WWIII.

In a statement on Friday morning, Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said that the US missile strike violated not only international, and added that the attack “was on the brink of military clashes with Russia.”

“Instead of their much-publicized thesis about a joint fight with a common enemy, Islamic State [IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL], the Trump administration has proven that it will fiercely fight against the legal government of Syria,” Medvedev wrote on his Facebook page.

Mattis is the worst Trump pick, Trump is a puppet of the neocons, and Tillerson, Haley, Mattis, and Coates should never have been confirmed. Bannon (or, as Trump himself suggested before running, Rand Paul) should have been declared VP. Trumpism is a farce. Tulsi 2020.

“Mattis is the worst Trump pick, Trump is a puppet of the neocons, and Tillerson, Haley, Mattis, and Coates should never have been confirmed. Bannon (or, as Trump himself suggested before running, Rand Paul) should have been declared VP. ”

Trump’s election itself was really improbable, but the Trump administration is even more improbable, and the reason is that gloablism is so entrenched among elites and within the Beltway that staffing a nationalist administration, whether a left nationalist or a right nationalist one, is a big problem. Trump himself is an example, as his lack of government experience has really shown in the last seventy or so days, but no one with experience at all was running on his agenda.

For example, both Ron and Rand Paul are good on many issues, but as open borders types neither can be employed in high positions in an administration whose main reason for existence is reducing immigration. Its really that simple. Getting someone who is lined up correction on all three “invade the world”, “invite the world”, and “in hoc to the world” is pretty much impossible. The best you can do is someone like Sessions, who is good on both immigration and trade, but will decide that the highest priority is going after pot smokers.

Then you have the issue that the federal government itself, as Mulvaney noted publically on Meet the Press, is in worse shape than most people realized. If there is a real chance of default because Congress can’t pass a budget or raise the debt ceiling, you probably have to let Goldman Sachs continue to run the Treasury department for the time being. My own suggestion earlier was that Trump punt on foreign policy, keeping the Obama policies but intervening just enough to keep the US out of a ground war (this was basically Obama’s own approach) and concentrate on trade and immigration, until he got up to speed.

But this is really just saying that the federal government and associated institutions may have gotten to the point where they are un-reformable. Well at least we will find out over the next four years.

But this is really just saying that the federal government and associated institutions may have gotten to the point where they are un-reformable. Well at least we will find out over the next four years.

That may well be it. The establishment is now so corrupted there simply aren't enough people to form a non-corrupted government.

So either Trump is no worse than the rest or (more likely imo) he's trapped by them - like Nixon, a checkmated king with a few close allies surrounded by the power of the media, banking mafia and neocons.

It's not really about Syria it's about control. If he can't hold the line against the neocons over Syria then he won't be able to hold the line over the demographic destruction of the West either.

Either way there's no point wasting energy being angry at Trump. He's probably trapped.

3. Makes KJ Un wonder how far he can go before he may be next to get the Tomahawks.

An interesting point I hadn't considered. Heard an interview on ecoshock recently about an EMP burst from the sun trashing our ability to function. I hadn't realised a well placed nuke would be so effective at shutting things down, it made sense at the current unease with North Korea.

Gutted at Trump today and already sore at him messing with Bannon. The moment Trump was inaugurated he should've been sending neo-cons to prison on any old nonsense charge to get them out of the way until he had time to think.

Allowing the mind to forget those 60 missiles must land, I heard they were 2 million a piece.

“An interesting point I hadn’t considered. Heard an interview on ecoshock recently about an EMP burst from the sun trashing our ability to function. I hadn’t realised a well placed nuke would be so effective at shutting things down, it made sense at the current unease with North Korea.”

This has become a fashionable doomsday scenario of late. However, it is not clear to me that there is any truth to it. It may prove to be about as realistic a scenario as the Y2K apocalypse. Whether a strong solar event could knock out electrical power distribution over an entire hemisphere is unknown.

Also unknown is whether a nuclear weapon could do so (I suspect it could not). There were a number of high altitude nuclear weapons tests conducted in the early 60s, by both the US and the Soviet Union. The course of history was not altered. Of course, they were not conducted over highly populated regions.

The war profiteers, Deep State operatives, and neocons are running foreign policy in the Trump administration. Just like they've run foreign policy in every recent administration, especially from Bush onward.

President Eisenhower warned us about the military-industrial complex.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY

Since then, 2 presidents have attempted to take on these people.

1. JFK - He ended up assassinated, supposedly by a guy (Oswald) who also was assassinated by another guy (Ruby) shortly afterward. Ruby would later claim LBJ did it and he was being kept from speaking the truth by a conspiracy. Years later, JFK's brother ended up assassinated by a guy (Sirhan Sirhan) who's mentally incapacitated and can barely talk.
2. Carter - His presidency was undone by Iran taking American hostages. Right after Reagan was inaugurated, the hostages were released. Then the new administration sold arms to Iran illegally (Iran-Contra).

How about nationalizing weapons manufacture industry and eliminating for-profit privatized military contracting?

Most of the military industrial complex products are simple enough for the govt to make themselves. Innovation can and will always be costly…. so pay big sums to the smart innovators themselves via high salaries or purchasing blueprints that mad geniuses draw up.

The current system enriches globalist corporations with constant incentive for new war, with no end in sight.

Another voter who's shocked that a politician did what he said he wouldn't do. Didn't Obama campaign on an non-interventionist foreign policy too? I mean, who campaigns by saying "I'm gonna bomb someone as soon as I get in office!"

All that matters is that Trump does what he said he'd do on immigration. Who cares about anything else. God, I hope I never find myself in a fox hole with you cut and runners.

“I mean, who campaigns by saying “I’m gonna bomb someone as soon as I get in office!””

John McCain. He also promised us a hundred-year war, which has to be one of the suckiest campaign promises ever. Although we seem to be well on our way to having one anyway.

I think Trump should be removed from office. We're not going to get a wall or an immigration moratorium anyway, so why tolerate an impulsive buffoon who'll put the world in jeopardy on a whim? He didn't even wait for an investigation to be completed. Now, he's spinning it as "launched quickly for the element of surprise." What a liar! He acted impulsively because he's an idiot who can't think for himself and now he's spinning his way out of it.

MANY people voted for him because they wished to avoid exactly what he just did. He ignored them and committed an act of war while also violating international law and the constitution. He needs to go and Sessions needs to be questioned on whether or not he advised Trump on the legality of this action. If he said it was legal, he also needs to go.

Trump has proved that he'll betray his base without thought. During the election, he was a symbol of resistance against political correctness and anti-white racism, but that's all he was. He wasn't what people really wanted him to be. He says "buy American" but appointed a Goldman Sachs guy as economic adviser. He said Iraq was a mistake but seems willing to repeat it with Syria. He embarrasses us on Twitter. He demoted Bannon. He said "drain the swamp" but filled it with unqualified cronies and family members. He was nothing but a charlatan all along.

In my opinion, the Russians have no choice but to retaliate in some fashion, otherwise Putin is DOA. That's a dangerous situation...all caused by this idiot. I've also read a report that is speculating that the US is hacking North Korean missiles and causing them to fail. He strikes me as very dangerous. Maybe Pence would be more even handed.

In my opinion, the Russians have no choice but to retaliate in some fashion, otherwise Putin is DOA.

Against the US? Color me skeptical. He might bomb the Kurds, but why? They’re a reliable thorn in Turkey’s side. If the Russians do anything against US troops, then the Russian presence in Syria is DOA – Trump will evict them post-haste.

"If the Russians do anything against US troops, then the Russian presence in Syria is DOA – Trump will evict them post-haste"

In the event that he tries it, I think it will be that clown Trump who will be evicted from the government post-haste. It's easy for American meatheads to mouth off about how strong they think they are after not having fought a real enemy in over half a century.

It's not as unlikely as you think. The Russian calculus has to be that this country cannot be negotiated with at this point as all diplomatic resolutions have failed and options on that front are exhausted. So, the US must be given a bloody nose to deter it. How? There are lots of ways. Perhaps giving weapons to the Taliban to overthrow the Afghan government or selling even more advanced weapons to China and/or Iran...there are lots of different things that can be done. The point is, something does have to be done. Otherwise, doing nothing will cause Trump and the neocohens to continue escalating. In the mean time, they should deploy more sophisticated air defenses to Syria. The next barrage of cruise missiles should be shot down. The Russians should also consider a separate peace deal with ISIS with the promise of giving them weapons to attack some vulnerable American asset such as Jordan.

Russians reporting the runways were undamaged by the strike. Russians are spinning this as American military ineffectiveness, seems way more likely we missed on purpose. For several hundred thousand apiece, a Tomahawk missile can't make a critical hit on a fucking runway in the middle of nowhere?

http://imgur.com/a/1VQq3

https://www.rt.com/news/383858-syria-us-strike-inefficient/

The strike on the Shayrat airfield in Syria’s Homs Province destroyed a material storage depot, a training facility, a canteen, six MiG-23 aircraft in repair hangars and a radar station.

The runway, taxiways and the Syrian aircraft on the parking apron remained undamaged, Russia’s Defense Ministry spokesman said in a statement.

Tomahawk missles are actually over a Million a piece, I believe.

With that many tomahawks fired and that much runway, it seems the only way we missed runway is if we were very *on* target, not off as Russia claims. Out of 59 ineffective tomahawks, at least one would land on some runway if it was off target.

A bit OT...
You remind me of Jackie Mason explaining why Israeli nuclear missiles are no threat to other countries in the Middle East: "Those things cost millions of dollars each. You think a Jew is gonna waste that kind of money on an Arab?"

Trying to be as optimistic about this as possible. It’s possible that Trump did this only to show the world that he is as capable of violence as his predecessors but is still more eager to negotiate than McCain and co. I suspect he made this strike to appease McCarthyite Democrats and warmongering neocons.

Possible that the chemical bombing was a false flag operation by the CIA. Who knows? But overall, I think Trump made the right move sending in the Tomahawks. It accomplishes several things:
1. Sends message to the world that Trump is more aggressive than Obama. More willing to kick some ass.
2. Sends message to Premier Xi that he is willing to use direct intervention against North Korea, so they had better step up and help fix that problem.
3. Makes KJ Un wonder how far he can go before he may be next to get the Tomahawks.
4. Confounds Dems who are chasing the Trump-Russia connection, especially when this was a move against Russian interests (Tillerson saying Russkies were insincere or inept not to know about the gassing).
5. Provokes positive feelings for Trump from those (never Trumpers) who have seen the videos of the suffering children and feel good that 'something' wasa done about it.

There are probably some other benefits. Ultimately though, Trump will never send more than a few ground troops into Syria. His bigger play in the mideast is (or should be) destabilizing Iran politically to rid that country of the crazy Mullahs.

The limited statement of aims that Trump gave wasn’t bad (Stephen Miller’s work?): chemical weapons are illegal under international treaties, and it is in our interest to punish any use of them. In so far as that goes, fine. If it is limited to that, then maybe this won’t betoken a return to invade-the-world (which Trump hadn’t really stopped so far anyway)/

Assad will just have to go back to killing civilians with explosives and shrapnel, which is how civilized governments slaughter innocents.

Only if you think you are policeman of the world. What is definitely illegal under international treaties is sending robot bombs into a country with which you are not at war, even if a Dead Baby Porn Exhibition is going on at the UN.

Hell we all remember W's promise of a more humble foreign policy, too. And how'd that work out?

It's gotten harder to believe Trump's playing 3D chess, but I'm not ready to give up on him yet. I remind myself, "Would things in any way be better if Lady MacBeth was in office?" (And the answer is, of course, NO.)

Hell we all remember W’s promise of a more humble foreign policy, too. And how’d that work out?

Conveniently leaving out the distinct possibility that the us government committed the atrocities on Sept. 11, 2011 or knew about it and let it happen.

It's ridiculous, in any event, to imply that we had to do more than attack Afghanistan and the taliban in order to avenge Sept. 11 and satisfy public opinion. The Iraq invasion and occupation wasn't needed for those purposes, nor is our brutal interference on behalf of Islamists in Syria and the Saudis in Yemen.

The error was to define the problem as one of foreign policy and not domestic security. Muslims in the U.S. should have had their visas revoked and sent packing. Muslim citizens should have been encouraged and bribed to renounce their citizenship and to leave the U.S. forever. No Muslims, no Muslim terrorism; look at Japan, it's really that simple.

Huge, vocal Trump supporter (despite being well aware of his flaws) and I am very done. This is a monumental betrayal. There is no possibility of believing anything he said.

This coming on top of the dismal Obamacare effort and the now obvious upcoming tax failure. These two are joint Republican and Presidential failures but wow.

Honestly done with democracy at this point now. From Tsipras in Greece to Trump in the US it is abundantly clear that democracy is an utter fiction. I’m fine with deep state players pushing things their way but the will of the people clearly is not a consideration.

I notice a number of posters think using labels is an argument, or that we should focus only on immigration - when what's at issue is Trump's word, and immigration is now a place we ought to be really concerned precisely because his word is in question.

All those statements, all those tweets condemning just this sort of action... what does it say about trust we can have in anything he's said?

I keep seeing people say this is a betrayal of Trump's base. Do you really think so? He was the rank and file military's candidate, not to mention the Israel lovers candidate. I would think a large part of his base is thrilled by this.

In 2008 and 2012, active duty military donated more to, and voted more for PEACE CANDIDATE RON PAUL than for any other candidate in the primaries. So having the support of active military suggests that one should STAY OUT of unnecessary nondefensive wars.

I wouldn't be too quick to pronounce the eulogy. Trump was always an imperfect ambassador for America Firstism. Better than Hillary, but very impetuous and unrooted. Surely there is another leader out there who is more ideologically grounded than Trump who could pick up the banner.

And get shot by the deep state…we are a powerless, occupied people with no outside allies who can help.

Trying to be as optimistic about this as possible. It's possible that Trump did this only to show the world that he is as capable of violence as his predecessors but is still more eager to negotiate than McCain and co. I suspect he made this strike to appease McCarthyite Democrats and warmongering neocons.

You’re onto something.

This attack, while it wrenched those of us opposed to ME interventions, it actually triangulated Trump to a center of sorts.

McCain and Graham immediately issued a statement urging further hawkish action, as will many neocon-biased media commentators. And anti-war people will flank Trump now.

So a targeted attack like this, if it doesn’t escalate, is actually the “moderate middle”. As stupid as it is, that is where we are.

First thought: the US tipped off the Russians who, surely, tipped off the Syrians. Not much actual damage done.

1. A token display of force to divert his increasingly unhinged critics. Leverage with Russia in advance of Tillerson's trip as they negotiate Assad's exit and joint plan on squashing the cockroaches.

2. The bored generals and You-Know-Who's finally got to him and it's off to war and endless occupation of yet another country that deeply resents us. Billions to bomb them, billions to rebuild them. More immigrants, and more Muslims with a grudge.

The problem with 1 is, who do you put in power in the Big Man's place? Syria is a snakepit and the Assads have spent so much time consolidating power that there's nobody competent outside their circle left. Does anybody know ANYONE in Syria ready to step up to the plate? Or does the CIA have some gray-haired guy on ice in a Northern Virginia suburb ready to roll out, who'll have to hire US mercs because he can't trust his own countrymen?

I just don't see how you implement 1 without it leading to 2.

I'm paused at grey-pill for now. But immigration was the issue that swept him into power (via the Electoral College) and he doesn't seem to be doing much on it. And now he's bit into something that could occupy his time 24/7 if he let it (like the perplexed LBJ with Vietnam).

The problem with 1 is, who do you put in power in the Big Man’s place? Syria is a snakepit and the Assads have spent so much time consolidating power that there’s nobody competent outside their circle left. Does anybody know ANYONE in Syria ready to step up to the plate? Or does the CIA have some gray-haired guy on ice in a Northern Virginia suburb ready to roll out, who’ll have to hire US mercs because he can’t trust his own countrymen?

It’s not a question of competence. It’s a question of legitimacy, as in whether the factions around Assad are willing to accept some other guy in his place. Not because they think Assad is any great shakes (and indeed, each of these faction leaders probably covets the throne for himself), but because the consensus there is that some version of the divine right of kings and primogeniture is an acceptable way to choose a leader, and Assad, as the hand-picked, non-imbecile son of the previous king, Hafez, fits the bill. The moment some other guy is put on the throne, all bets are off, and you get the Roman situation where the elites fought major civil wars to decide who would get to rule. Which the ruling Alawites can’t really afford, given that the Alawite fighting age population has lost, on a proportional basis, 15x what the US lost during WWII.

and that makes a certain sort of sense. The problem here is the local opposition are jihadis.

It's a flesh wound - we told the Russians just before the attack and they presumably told the Syrians. It sends a message without really going all that far for the opposition. As Matt Continetti put it:

I do think that this operation was about the best one could hope for: the message and objective was clear, the focus limited, the force overwhelming, support broad and deep. Assad may think twice before using these deadly agents again.

But the momentum appears to be on Assad's side, and we're not really arming the opposition. You might even say that Trump chose this nothingburger missile attack to deflect any pressure - due to the gas attack- to supply the opposition, which would be far more dangerous for Assad's survival.

President Trump is considering a broad shakeup of his White House that could include the replacement of White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus and the departure of chief strategist Steve Bannon, aides and advisers tell us.

Maybe Pipes realised that it’s no longer necessary to propagandise the population on intervention, they’ve all been trained to know the wars will keep coming, like the rain. So he can get onto discrediting Trump and nationalism as potential threats. Seriously, there are teenagers alive today who’ve known nothing else but the US at war in the middle east.

They don’t even have to lie any more. It don’t matter; none of this matters.

Hell we all remember W’s promise of a more humble foreign policy, too. And how’d that work out?

Can't do humble with 3000 dead in DC and NYC on a single day.

Conveniently leaving out the distinct possibility that the us government committed the atrocities on Sept. 11, 2011 or knew about it and let it happen.

It’s ridiculous, in any event, to imply that we had to do more than attack Afghanistan and the taliban in order to avenge Sept. 11 and satisfy public opinion. The Iraq invasion and occupation wasn’t needed for those purposes, nor is our brutal interference on behalf of Islamists in Syria and the Saudis in Yemen.

Trying to be as optimistic about this as possible. It's possible that Trump did this only to show the world that he is as capable of violence as his predecessors but is still more eager to negotiate than McCain and co. I suspect he made this strike to appease McCarthyite Democrats and warmongering neocons.

he made this strike to appease McCarthyite Democrats and warmongering neocons.

If 88 dimensional chess was real, doing the bombing then calling out the chemical weapons hoax and executing all these Neocon deep state guys for treason on the grounds that they lied Trump into doing a bombing would be a great masterstroke. But it’s not real. Trump is just fucking up

This is a thread with which I am in agreement with 95% of you people. I am really disappointed with this guy. I am wavering between "he has already been threatened by the Deep State" or "he is a smart guy with no wisdom".

Though we all knew that Trump didn't have a deep knowledge of history and politics like a Pat Buchanan, he almost always seemed to let his instincts steer him the right way - not just picking Jeff Sessions for AG, but talking to him early on in the campaign to get good knowledge of the immigration problem. On the 2nd amendment he came around from being one of the few, big shots in NY City who could bear arms or have body guards, and hell with the little guy, to a man who got the earliest endorsement by the NRA ever (?) - course, running against the Hildabeast, I guess that last is no big feat.

Even so, I really thought this guy was smart. Maybe he is, but he needs to get back to his roots now!

Lastly, as I wrote under the Buchanan post about N. Korea, along with the fact that this Syria war has no bearing on the defense of the US of A, this country is beyond broke at this point! Does this former captain of industry not know the financial situation? (He did seem to, in a speech in S. Florida during the campaign that I cannot find). We have no real money to make war around the world - this is all borrowed, and someone will pay one way or another - taxation of your grandchildren, or more likely, default or hyperinflation causing great financial pain.

We had a chance to have Ron Paul and the American public rejected him. We have the broken system we have of politics+corporations+media and there is no dismantling it apparently. Just a slow, sinking decay.

We will end with a whimper, not a bang. Too many fat, celebrity worshippers who don’t care about their people or land.

In spite of media reaction, or perhaps befitting it, this was really nothing, like Bill C. dropping ordnance on the pharma factory in Sudan. By the way, there's yer new headline talking-point, Trump wagging the dog to distract from his Russia Scandals or Kellyanne Conway's feet on the couch. In other words, a day ending in Y.

I anticipate the Unz Rev bullpen getting disenchanted and crestfallen, and penning their new versions of The God That Failed to go on sale from CreateSpace for $8.95. Basically I still think Trump is non-interventionist, though not very ideological about it. Through the ideological lens, this looks like an error. The Colin Powell "If you break it you bought it" is true despite being clumsily expressed. We shouldn't be prodding ISIS's battlefield opponents except under utilitarian ends of protecting our soldiers (who shouldn't be over there to begin with, yeah yeah, but guess what, they are). Through the barely ideological, shake-up-the-Beltway Trumpian amateur kabuki lens, this is easy for him to explain, like a caped superhero setting the drug dealer's lab on fire. I think it will be hilarious to watch the contortions of the Russian Menace thumpers adjusting to this "nonsensical plot twist." Day 28: Trump Still Offers No Evidence of R2P Quality-Assurance of Syria Strike

I presume a bunch of generals went to Trump and said they could win the war in Syria and resolve the refugee crisis if we could dump these Obama-era half measures and go in full bore the way the military always wants to do in these situations. And Trump listened and agreed it would be the best way to end mass emigration out of Syria, and cut the army’s down-the-road expenses if we actually win, and produce a nice, shiny victory to make Trump look good and give Obama’s competence a black eye in the history books. To Trump, who’s a risk-taker, it’s worth a try.

I wouldn’t be surprised if Merkel lobbied him when he met with her, and she said she’d arrange for the EU to send its refugees back IF Trump could provide a win and a stable country for the refugees to go to, and of course Trump would be resolving not just one crisis but two, namely Europe’s and Syria’s, and she capped all this by putting her pinky in her mouth and begged like an ingenue for him to be everyone’s savior, which Trump couldn’t resist, and of course Merkel didn’t mention that Trump would also be saving her political butt at the same time. Trump is being suckered here, but he’s also the sort of guy who would have a hard time resisting the bait.

However, if we end up with an other unstable Mideast state as a client state like Iraq, it’s not going to be cheap and it will be a major hassle to run. We may not intend to be a colonial power, but that’s how we keep ending up every time we end up in a foreign war. It’s only the US presence afterwards that provides any peace. By 2050, we may be a new Roman empire with the whole Mideast as our client state.

Yet another problem is how seriously the Russians want to support Assad. Trump may present them with a fait accompli, and say we won, here’s the peace terms, take it or leave it, and they just might agree, but their establishment will be ticked off and gunning for Trump’s fall afterwards.

And if the push doesn’t work, Trump’s going to find out every new president has their Bay of Pigs, and for the same reasons. But I’m willing to wait and see if he succeeds.

My impression of Iran is a bunch of young people who would be openly drinking alcohol tomorrow if the old clerics who took power in the late 1970's were to disappear. Never been there so I'm happy to be proved wrong.

Wow it’s so crazy to be cognizant of the damage that alcohol use does to society.

Iranians already drink alcohol. They would just do so openly, as was commonly seen thru the region outside the Arab monarchies until the clerical takeover. The larger point being, Iranians seem rather restless under the Shia clerics' gerontocracy. But again, I'm not there so that's just my impressions from some TV programs I've seen.

If 88 dimensional chess was real, doing the bombing then calling out the chemical weapons hoax and executing all these Neocon deep state guys for treason on the grounds that they lied Trump into doing a bombing would be a great masterstroke. But it's not real. Trump is just fucking up

would be a great masterstroke. But it’s not real.

Bumbling into wars against any American interest, to enthusiastic applause of Israel, U.S. neocon-guard regimists, and the MSNBC-Left…

Importation of cheap labor that lowers our incomes and changes our demographics is commonly called immigration, both legal and illegal.

Importation of cheap goods and services, which lower our incomes and our ability to make and do things for ourselves, is commonly called trade.

Immigration and trade were Trump’s two big campaign issues. Rolled into one: imports are destroying the United States and its core Citizens.

Shedding our blood, treasure and reputation to tear apart the Middle East for Israel is an important issue too, and it is probably connected with the same, globalist plan that imports are. So here we have that issue playing out. Let’s see what he does with the other one — the one that matters more the the American people.

Bad info? What's that? Shoot first, ask questions last or the terrorists win! Pay no attention to the man holding the strings. This is President Donald Trump speaking...I am not a puppet. I am the decider!

As bad as it all turned out, at least W attacked Iraq under the pretext, which turned out to be false, that Saddam Hussein had stockpiles of WMD. The implication being that he could use them against the U.S. Here, there is not even an argument that the Assad regime is any kind of a threat to the U.S. They’re just mean.

Hitler threatened US Jews with retaliation against European Jews if US is pushed into war. It didn't work, because there's no secret Jewish cabal. It only made Jews feel even more hostility to Hitler. To the extent that Jews pushed the US into war against Hitler (and it's not impossible the US would've entered without them), Hitler's threats only made them more anti-Hitler. Same thing would happen if Putin threatened Israel.

Seems a big deal at least because it is certainly in violation of international law and probably unlawful under the Constitution.

I’m opposed to the attack on Syria but who cares about international law? If (unlike in this case) it’s in our national interest, then do it. International law be damned. International law is not law at all. What sovereign power enacts and enforces international law?

It's not very significant in and of itself but it's part of a broader problem of not being able to stand up to establishment conservatives, which has been an issue since inauguration day but seems to be getting worse and worse

Indeed. I don’t care about Syria.

But personally, i’m appalled that Trump is wasting Tomahawks on some Syrian airbase, when there are *federal judges* at war with the American people and Constitution still walking around free.

I think Trump should be removed from office. We're not going to get a wall or an immigration moratorium anyway, so why tolerate an impulsive buffoon who'll put the world in jeopardy on a whim? He didn't even wait for an investigation to be completed. Now, he's spinning it as "launched quickly for the element of surprise." What a liar! He acted impulsively because he's an idiot who can't think for himself and now he's spinning his way out of it.

MANY people voted for him because they wished to avoid exactly what he just did. He ignored them and committed an act of war while also violating international law and the constitution. He needs to go and Sessions needs to be questioned on whether or not he advised Trump on the legality of this action. If he said it was legal, he also needs to go.

Trump has proved that he'll betray his base without thought. During the election, he was a symbol of resistance against political correctness and anti-white racism, but that's all he was. He wasn't what people really wanted him to be. He says "buy American" but appointed a Goldman Sachs guy as economic adviser. He said Iraq was a mistake but seems willing to repeat it with Syria. He embarrasses us on Twitter. He demoted Bannon. He said "drain the swamp" but filled it with unqualified cronies and family members. He was nothing but a charlatan all along.

In my opinion, the Russians have no choice but to retaliate in some fashion, otherwise Putin is DOA. That's a dangerous situation...all caused by this idiot. I've also read a report that is speculating that the US is hacking North Korean missiles and causing them to fail. He strikes me as very dangerous. Maybe Pence would be more even handed.

“Maybe Pence would be more even handed”.

Pence would be even worse, a huge neocon warmonger and a Christian Zionist to boot. Everything else that you have written is spot on. Trump is nothing but a buffoon, a liar and a traitor. He is also dangerous. If he is willing to go this far with Syria based on such shaky evidence, what else could he do? It is really terrifying to think.

Unfortunately, Trump supporters are between a rock and a hard place. If Trump goes, then its Pence.

This debacle is a direct result of our negligence in failing to promptly hang the chiselers who lied us into Iraq. Though many believe the foreign policy establishment are incorrigible, I am quite sure that a row of corpses swinging from a hastily-built gallows on the National Mall would have done wonders to re-orient their priorities. If you find public hanging too gruesome, blindfolds and a pockmarked wall would have served equally well.

I’ve wanted this since we invaded Iraq and I am disappointed with Obama for not delivering.

A victory by either side would be equally undesirable for the United States. At this point, a prolonged stalemate is the only outcome that would not be damaging to American interests.

Indeed, it would be disastrous if President Bashar al-Assad’s regime were to emerge victorious after fully suppressing the rebellion and restoring its control over the entire country. Iranian money, weapons and operatives and Hezbollah troops have become key factors in the fighting, and Mr. Assad’s triumph would dramatically affirm the power and prestige of Shiite Iran and Hezbollah, its Lebanon-based proxy — posing a direct threat both to the Sunni Arab states and to Israel.

But a rebel victory would also be extremely dangerous for the United States and for many of its allies in Europe and the Middle East. That’s because extremist groups, some identified with Al Qaeda, have become the most effective fighting force in Syria. If those rebel groups manage to win, they would almost certainly try to form a government hostile to the United States. Moreover, Israel could not expect tranquility on its northern border if the jihadis were to triumph in Syria. …

a decisive outcome for either side would be unacceptable for the United States. An Iranian-backed restoration of the Assad regime would increase Iran’s power and status across the entire Middle East, while a victory by the extremist-dominated rebels would inaugurate another wave of Al Qaeda terrorism. There is only one outcome that the United States can possibly favor: an indefinite draw. By tying down Mr. Assad’s army and its Iranian and Hezbollah allies in a war against Al Qaeda-aligned extremist fighters, four of Washington’s enemies will be engaged in war among themselves and prevented from attacking Americans or America’s allies. That this is now the best option is unfortunate, indeed tragic, but favoring it is not a cruel imposition on the people of Syria, because a great majority of them are facing exactly the same predicament.

So,maybe it was a four-leaf clover, rabbit’s foot, horseshoe,wishbone,or tortoiseshell cat, but strategic thinking certainly was not Trump’s amulet that got his nepotistic lizard-brain in the White House.

And now, his hyper-chosen in-laws, his trumprecious pride, his shekel-pouring sheldons, and his mortal enemies from the Unintelligence Community convinced him that all the trouble at home would disappear, once he unfolds favorite Hasbaro-Neocon table-game on the Resolute desk:

"Mattis is the worst Trump pick, Trump is a puppet of the neocons, and Tillerson, Haley, Mattis, and Coates should never have been confirmed. Bannon (or, as Trump himself suggested before running, Rand Paul) should have been declared VP. "

Trump's election itself was really improbable, but the Trump administration is even more improbable, and the reason is that gloablism is so entrenched among elites and within the Beltway that staffing a nationalist administration, whether a left nationalist or a right nationalist one, is a big problem. Trump himself is an example, as his lack of government experience has really shown in the last seventy or so days, but no one with experience at all was running on his agenda.

For example, both Ron and Rand Paul are good on many issues, but as open borders types neither can be employed in high positions in an administration whose main reason for existence is reducing immigration. Its really that simple. Getting someone who is lined up correction on all three "invade the world", "invite the world", and "in hoc to the world" is pretty much impossible. The best you can do is someone like Sessions, who is good on both immigration and trade, but will decide that the highest priority is going after pot smokers.

Then you have the issue that the federal government itself, as Mulvaney noted publically on Meet the Press, is in worse shape than most people realized. If there is a real chance of default because Congress can't pass a budget or raise the debt ceiling, you probably have to let Goldman Sachs continue to run the Treasury department for the time being. My own suggestion earlier was that Trump punt on foreign policy, keeping the Obama policies but intervening just enough to keep the US out of a ground war (this was basically Obama's own approach) and concentrate on trade and immigration, until he got up to speed.

But this is really just saying that the federal government and associated institutions may have gotten to the point where they are un-reformable. Well at least we will find out over the next four years.

Then you have the issue that the federal government itself, as Mulvaney noted publically on Meet the Press, is in worse shape than most people realized.

One hundred years ago - almost to the day - the United States entered WWI, sending us down the path to global empire while remaining a republic at home.

Around 50 years ago, we decided to turn a relatively homogeneous, prosperous nation into a multi-racial, multi-ethnic conglomerate and to adopt the national religion I call The Cult of Equality.

Now, we are witnessing the end of the Republic.

Trump was our last chance, as slim as it was. He had the money and arrogance to take on the establishment. He is failing us. There will not another politician who doesn't need other people's money or who is willing to get eviscerated in the press day after day.

Unless Trump start acting on immigration soon, we can list this time as the point where we knew for certain that the country was lost.

Around 50 years ago, we decided to turn a relatively homogeneous, prosperous nation into a multi-racial, multi-ethnic conglomerate and to adopt the national religion I call The Cult of Equality.

We didn’t do it. Our lying leaders did it. The American people never agreed to have our demographics changed, and we were assured that it wouldn’t happen.

Contrary to Chance The Bomber's Neoconstructivism, Putin's art of the deal with China is big and beautiful exercise of Holochess Mastery ;
http://cdn.static-economist.com/sites/default/files/images/print-edition/20160702_CNM957.png

Once transactions of oil deals start happening in rubble/ yuan/rial/rupee or gold, there will be no Tomahawk in the world that would prevent financial sandstorms from ravaging Gulf's petro$-medieval principalities.

For good.

Unfortunately, it will be game over for US as well; unless some wannabee-strong looking president doesn't decide to start undeclared WWIII.

Oh, wait...

In a statement on Friday morning, Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said that the US missile strike violated not only international, and added that the attack “was on the brink of military clashes with Russia.”

“Instead of their much-publicized thesis about a joint fight with a common enemy, Islamic State [IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL], the Trump administration has proven that it will fiercely fight against the legal government of Syria,” Medvedev wrote on his Facebook page.